Sunday At The Mall
By Mitch Berg
I biked over to the Capital Mall on Sunday to watch the union “peace” rally on the Capitol steps.
I inadvertently got there very early – guess I don’t know my own strength! – so I went down to the World War II memorial, at the foot of the mall by the Veterans Services buildling.
An older couple were there, wearing matching T-shirts commemorating their son, an Army major who’d been about a year and a half older than me when he was killed last year in Iraq.
Now, I can’t pretend to imagine what it’s like to lose a child; the safety of my own children is a constant nagging worry in the back of my own head. I’m no shrinking violet, and I’m certainly not the most sensitive guy, but I do know when to just shut up and let people talk.
And the woman – the bereaved mother – did talk. She must have figured she was among friends, being on the grounds of a “peace” rally (and, indeed, she was; some things should transcend politics; caring for our kids and loving them more than anything in the world is one of them), and she unloaded, as her husband stood quietly by, admiring the WWII memorial.
She was angry. Still demolished with grief.
She raged against the President.
I wasn’t about to argue. I disagreed, naturally, but what could I say? What should anyone say? She’d lost her son; for her, the sky might be red and the sun might rise in the west. I can’t say as I’d see differently in her shoes.
And then she added “…it’s 2007. We should be able to settle things by talking…”.
I wondered – to myself, of course – if, 65 years ago, Jewish advocates in Poland might have postulated the same ideal; that if they could only talk with Hitler, they could find a way to settle things, before the rest of their families disappeared into the nacht und nebel? If some Ukranian kulak pondered the idea of just getting a letter through to Staliln to try to settle things as his children starved to death during Stalin’s famine, or if a Cambodian merchant or a Tutsi farmer yearned just to try to settle things like human beings as doom engulfed them and their families? If some gay Afghan or pregnant Iranian teenager had a the urge to try to reason with their killers before the evil snuffed them out? Did they believe that evil could be placated? That behind the implacable mask of the Nazi, the chekist, the Khmer Rouge ideologue or Hutu zealot or Taliban or mullah, or muj with a cell phone alongside some road in Iraq, was someone who just needed to be reasoned with?
I didn’t know, and I didn’t ask. I nodded, and listened, and expressed my genuine mutual sorrow.
———-
As the couple walked away toward the capitol, I noticed a group of people – younger and middle-aged – in red polo shirts, gathering around the memorial’s reflecting pool. One of them came over and greeted me; I was among friends – in this case, “Families United“, a group of people whose children, spouses or siblings are in Iraq – or, in a few cases, who died there also.
As the people in the distance on the Capitol steps slowly gathered and strummed guitars, the Families United group – two dozen people, altogether – gathered under the American flag and had a brief observance. The founder – Merilee Carlson, who lost a son in Iraq – read some letters from some of her group’s sympathizers who were also members of the participating trade unions, and were outraged that their unions would spend their dues money on demonstrating to scupper the troops’ mission.
———-
And money, they spent – although apparently not on trying to help people get there on time. The permit was slated to kick off at 1PM; people were draggling in until two o’clock; between one and two, the crowd swelled from 200 to maybe 500.
Four fairly posh motor coaches lined up on Constitution Avenue, reminding us that this wasn’t the same crowd we’d had two weeks earlier (at least, some of it differed); the unions, the AFL-CIO and AFSCME, among others, had pulled out the stops to make the day as low-impact as possible on their members.
And still, over half of the “crowd” was the usual suspects; the ACORN crowd, the poverty pimps from various “church” “social justice” groups – everyone but the anarchists, it’d seem. It didn’t look like the “A-team” of protesters; the signs looked wan and halfhearted; a guy wandered up and down the Mall walkway, banging a pot to no apparent purposes (and yes, if the other guys start that “banging on pots” thing at the convention next year, I am bringing the bagpipes. Oh, yes I am). They didn’t know much about sound; they brought a PA system fit to handle a sock hop in a junior high gym; the speakers all exhibited that tendency that inexperienced, underamplified speakers do, shrieking into the microphone like they were hollering to be heard above a nor’easter.
The protesters shied away from talking in person; they’re smarter than most demonstrators (the ones that approached us two weeks earlier were generally woefully illiterate on current events, if not on talking points).
I left after a bit; it was too nice a day.
Janet Beihoffer and Jamie Delton were there, and covered things.
September 25th, 2007 at 1:54 pm
I appreciate the tone of this post, Mitch. It’s regrettable that the right’s frustration with this incompetently prosecuted war more often manifests itself in nasty attacks on anti-war parents who, though often naive and wrongheaded in their proposed solutions, have lost their children. It’s a shame that Ann Coulter and her ilk don’t have your good sense and maturity.
September 25th, 2007 at 3:15 pm
[…] Update: Just happened to notice that Mitch Berg had this in a touching post: I wondered – to myself, of course – if, 65 years ago, Jewish advocates in Poland might have postulated the same ideal; that if they could only talk with Hitler, they could find a way to settle things, before the rest of their families disappeared into the nacht und nebel? If some Ukranian kulak pondered the idea of just getting a letter through to Staliln to try to settle things as his children starved to death during Stalin’s famine, or if a Cambodian merchant or a Tutsi farmer yearned just to try to settle things like human beings as doom engulfed them and their families? If some gay Afghan or pregnant Iranian teenager had a the urge to try to reason with their killers before the evil snuffed them out? Did they believe that evil could be placated? That behind the implacable mask of the Nazi, the gaybist, the Khmer Rouge ideologue or Hutu zealot or Taliban or mullah, or muj with a cell phone alongside some road in Iraq, was someone who just needed to be reasoned with? […]
September 25th, 2007 at 3:18 pm
I appreciate the tone of this post, Mitch. It’s regrettable that the left’s general hatred of the military and helping free oppressed people manifests itself in nasty attacks on pro-freedom/liberty parents who, though often naive to the left’s venom, have lost their children. It’s a shame that Michael Moore/Al Franken/Cindy Sheehan/Bill Maher don’t have your good sense and maturity.
September 25th, 2007 at 3:48 pm
Your analogy to the Jewish sitaution is beyond repellant, it’s obscene.
First, Iraq wasn’t Nazi Germany, that meme is as stupid as it is wrong. It had NOTHING like the power of Germany, it wasn’t – in the main – gassing it’s civilians, yes it DID do so to the Kurds, and Houssien was a monster, but so was Moussoulini, and the more appropriate comparison would have been there, as the Italians used mustard and phosgene on the Eritriens.
This constant need to propogandize and romanticize and wrap yourself in WWII is absurd. That war was about egalitarianism first and foremost, about the fact that we felt oppression, on a global scale, HAD to be stood up to.
The ability of the radical Muslim world to dominate even it’s OWN populace is dubious. The ability of radical Muslims to dominate Europe, the US, or China, India, etc.. is beyond dubious to laughably ludicrous. Further, it’s again a change of subject from the reality.
Iraq IS NOT about radical Sunni-ism, not even close. In fact, the success of Patraeus amply illustrates just how much the average Sunni in Iraq has contempt for Al Qaeda.
BTW Dave, I’m from the left, I find your comment that I hate the military highly offsenive, beyond the fact that I, my sister, my father, and my Grandfather are veterans, three of us serving during wartime, if not serving in the war proper, I find your comments offensive becuase the left has normally shown far more compassion for the soldiers, for wanting to fight the good fight, than the right EVER has. Go read about WWII, or for that matter Bosnia, where the Right, Ironically to this post, wanted to STAY OUT of genocide it didn’t consider in our sphere of influence or of strategic worth to us. And that is Irony, that Mitch Berg, lapdog of the right, would select a perfect example not only of how this is NOT WW2, but of a situation where the right, as is it’s way, basically said, screw the (Jews) Arabs in Iraq, it’s not our problem, they’re expendable, they’re civilians, and lots of things are fair in love and war.
That said, I DO appreciate your forebearance with these two people. Clearly, confronting them would have been the height of tactlessness and gaul. My wife’s parent’s lost a child, and you’re right, neither you nor I have ANY concept of how hard that is.. vicariously I’ll tell you, it’s the next closest thing to losing your soul. That said, you then went on to say in her world the sky might be red.. implying that her impressions are factually false. How would you know? For that matter, how are you POSSIBLY an authority on it? Your comments on Iraq have been so consistently wrong, including here, that for all we know, grief or not, the sky MAY be red in your world, the sun MAY rise in the west.. your observations are no less likely to be blindered, offbase and foolish.
Still, you were at least kind, and for that, you deserve thanks, and so.
Thank you.
September 25th, 2007 at 3:59 pm
Your analogy to the Jewish sitaution is beyond repellant, it’s obscene.
No, Pat, it’s a perfectly legitimate question: can evil be reasoned with?
you then went on to say in her world the sky might be red..
Meaning “she will see things in ways that I just can not”. Not imparting or “implying” rightness or wrongness.
September 25th, 2007 at 4:13 pm
Yeah, I don’t think the World War 2 analogy was at all apt, but it’s true that “talking” unaccompanied by force or the credible threat of force can sometimes be worse than ineffective.
September 25th, 2007 at 4:15 pm
“That war was about egalitarianism first and foremost . . .”
Is a statement that would have surprised the soldiers fighting on the front and the civilians at home.
Capra’s “Why We Fight” series explains what they were fighting for in terms even a peevish can understand.
September 25th, 2007 at 4:16 pm
I don’t think the World War 2 analogy was at all apt
I wasn’t comparing wars.
September 25th, 2007 at 4:17 pm
The left’s general hatred of the military is deep-rooted and well documented. Blather all you want, pb. Take a look at the West Metro section letter from a complete boob in Maple Grove to see more proof. If the General Betray Us stuff from moveon.org doesn’t convince you…nothing will.
September 25th, 2007 at 4:24 pm
Who was a worse dictator: Houssien, Moussoulini, Poul Pout, Maou or Toujou?
September 25th, 2007 at 4:31 pm
Worst as in body-count? Then, according to pb and the rest of the loony-left…you missed the worst dictator of all, Chad. BUSH!
September 25th, 2007 at 4:34 pm
What’s the current Iraq body count, pb? Including civilians? One million? Heck, let’s make it two million. Nobody has credible proof of either, but that doesn’t stop the loony lefties like pb.
September 25th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
Jeez, Peev, I really didn’t want to get into this.
So I won’t.
I find your comments offensive becuase the left has normally shown far more compassion for the soldiers, for wanting to fight the good fight, than the right EVER has.
If I read the phone book and Peev isn’t there to hear it, am I still offensive? Just curious.
If you view things selectively enough, you’re right. And still wrong.
You can not deny that the leftward fringe of the Democrats detests the military.
I’d never dream of pasteing that on top of the entire Democrat party. Try it.
Go read about WWII, or for that matter Bosnia, where the Right, Ironically to this post, wanted to STAY OUT of genocide it didn’t consider in our sphere of influence or of strategic worth to us.
Er, yeah. Entirely separate issues. Paleoconservatism IS highly isolationist. No denying it. Neoconservatism is Wilsonian. Is that a good thing (as you seem to imply) or a bad thing (since it’s “neocon”)?
To tell you the truth, I’m not sure who’s right.
I’ll ask my actively-serving and veteran friends – going back to the Carter era – who treated the military better, all in all. Comments?
September 25th, 2007 at 6:58 pm
“I am writing too in the hope that my telling this one story will help you to understand more clearly how so many fine people have come to find themselves still loving their country but loathing the military, to which you and other good men have devoted years, lifetimes, of the best service you could give.”
Bill Clinton, letter to Col. Holmes, 3rd Dec. 1969.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/etc/draftletter.html
September 26th, 2007 at 12:50 am
Well, my 2 cents…
I am not the kind that would serve in the military, but I am darn glad they are there, so I support them all the more for doing a job I cannot – keeping theis coutry safe.
Soldiers lost in battle are someone’s son or daughter, and losing a child is a horrible thing. However, I firmly believe that their service has prevented a larger number of civilian casualities in this country. They did and are doing their (tough) job.
Say whatever you want about the war in Iraq, (I say the war is over, and mop-up is needed but the current administration is not ruthless enough to do that properly.) but it is better than attacking a WWII ally:)
For the record, the WMDs did exist – some were made here in Minnesota. (the fuel-air bomb for one and Saddam never used any so…) I read General Sada’s book and I for one believe him. Saddam had ties to terrorism and sent his WMDs to Syria where some were used to supply some jerks in a nasty attack on Israel. Don’t worry, there is much more ordinence left over to be found in Syria.
Yes, bring the troops home but not before they finish the job, or all those sons and daughters will have died for little or nothing. Iraq has wanted self government for a long time, but has never had it until now. They need time and further help to stabilizethe region.
I just think the troop surge was too small.
Mitch, that post showed how you can keep politics out of things when they should be. (talking to that mother) bravo. Others can learn from that example.
The comparison to WWII was appropriate because you were pointing out that one cannot simply discuss things with evil. They will just shoot you while you are talking anyway.
No matter what we would prefer to do, we have to “match their evil” in terms of armed force. We do not choose the battlefields or the type of conflict. They choose the means, we choose to defend and stay free. For that I’m grateful.
I’ll go back to roasting my spotted owl on the jungle-wood-fired BBQ now.
September 26th, 2007 at 4:43 am
Your two cents is overpriced, Old Buddy. Of course we (and by “we” Angryclown means “you wingnuts and the incompetent president you voted for”) chose this battlefield. There’s no connection between the attacks we suffered on 9/11 and Saddam’s regime, the way there clearly was to the Taliban in Afghanistan. We had a number of choices after taking the necessary step of deposing Afghanistan’s regime. One was to pursue the displaced al Qaeda and Taliban leadership instead of permitting them to set up shop in Pakistan. Bush chose unwisely and executed poorly.
September 26th, 2007 at 9:51 am
Clown, Clown, Clown, Clown, Clown. Sigh.
9/11 changed everything. The only response to evil was force. It doesn’t matter whether Saddam was involved in 9/11, he was still evil. And where there’s evil, America has no choice but to invade. And anyone who disagrees is a military-hating evil-lover.
You here me, Iran! North Korea! Syria! China! Myanmar! Sudan! Venezuela! Cuba! San Francisco! Rudy’s coming for you!
And he’s gonna register your firearms, too!
/jc
September 26th, 2007 at 10:12 am
I can empathize, but even in times of grief, my pragmatism would have a hard time not saying something along the lines of, “Ma’am, I understand the torment you are experiencing over the loss of your son. But you have to understand this concept: When you say “…it’s 2007. We should be able to settle things by talking…”, you have to realize that THEIR side, the side of the terrorists and insurgents who killed your son, are NOT LIVING IN 2007. They are still living in an 8th century ideological mindset. They are not willing to engage in diplomacy and “talking”. The only thing they are willing and capable of using is force, and therefore they must be forcefully repelled and destroyed. I’m sorry your son was killed, and am grateful he gave the ultimate sacrifice. His death is a part of the effort to ensure we don’t become like them.
And I’d fully expect her to kick me in the shins afterwards, and I’d even understand it. But I would hope and pray that with the passage of time to heal her grieving, she could understand better and see the big picture.
September 26th, 2007 at 10:59 am
A good thing Mitch has more good sense and class than you, Bill C.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:16 am
Sounds like you saw my Godparents…
http://linkert.name/blog/2006/01/sad-news.html
Thank you for being respectful Mitch.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:36 am
You are correct.
My condolences to your extended family.
September 26th, 2007 at 11:39 am
Now, Slash – who’d seem to have a loose bolt on his sarcasmotron – you’ve come across as very pro-Israel in the past. Do I remember that correctly?
You defend the state of Israel. Nicht?
Israel was founded precisely because Jews realized that they had to back up negotiation not only with resolve, but occasionally with force. And, if I recall correctly, you’ve justified much of the force Israel has used in self-defense.
(While I expect either a pseudo-legalistic squirm or another gust of sarcasm in response, I figured I’d have to ask).
September 26th, 2007 at 12:03 pm
> And, if I recall correctly, you’ve justified much of the force Israel has used in self-defense.
In the interest of full disclosure, I must admit that Mitch has me there.
Of course I should note my opposition to the war against the Amorites. Totally unnecessary and destabilized the region for generations to come.
Joshua should never have listened to Norman Podhoretz.
/jc
September 26th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
A good thing Mitch has more good sense and class than you, Bill C.
Your powers of observation are astounding, angrydunt (-d +c).
September 29th, 2007 at 2:27 am
Oh,
AC, you got me, argh!
What else but insults and a lack of understanding can I expect from someone whose greatest literary feat was his composition: “All I know, I learned from Michael Moore.”
What part of “…some things should transcend politics…” did you not understand?
Oh yeah, the part they did not tell you to believe at your left wing comspiracy meetings.
Mitch showed the respect and good sense to be kind to that lady, which is more than I would believe you would do if the politics were reversed and you were in his shoes. (If you need that explained, talk to someone whose IQ is two or more digits long. 😉 Oh yeah, you probably don’t know any Conservatives personally.
By the way, this “wingnut” didn’t vote for Bush – either time. Figure that one out.
October 11th, 2007 at 3:37 pm
[…] Update: See, I was never very good at the speed thing. Mitch used his horsey was sitting there waiting for me. […]