Fiddling While Rome Burns
Tweet
Military deaths in Iraq hit 2,500
The number of U.S. military deaths in Iraq has reached 2,500, the Pentagon said on Thursday, underscoring warnings that the killing of al Qaeda’s leader in the country would not end relentless violence.
Bush hosts annual congressional picnic
President Bush was the host of the annual congressional picnic Thursday at the White House, but it was his chief of staff’s band that came close to stealing the show.
“We got some interesting entertainment for you tonight,” Bush told lawmakers and their families to the picnic, called “Rodeo on the South Lawn.”
“We got some people who can play music and some people who think they can play music,” the president said.
Bush was upbeat, although still weary from his trip this week to Baghdad.
President Bush greets guests during the Congressional Picnic on the South Lawn of the White House
U.S. Rep. Collin Peterson, D-Minn., plays guitar in the congressional band ‘The Second Amendments” during the Congressional Picnic
U.S. President George W. Bush and First Lady Laura Bush arrive at the White House Congressional Picnic on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington
White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten plays the bass with his band ‘The Compassionates’ during the Congressional Picnic
43 Responses to “Fiddling While Rome Burns”
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
What Time Is Super Bowl 2012 (Super Bowl XLVI)?
Republican Senate Candidate To Run Racist Ad During Super Bowl
Latest Entries
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
C.K.: November 22, 1999 – January 7, 2012
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
Oliver, knock it off…
Has your life come to an end since the war in Iraq began?
What should he do, everytime we hit one of those “media anniversaries” : ______ days since “Mission Accomplished”; __________ days since Invasion of Iraq; ________ days since 9/11; ____500 soldiers dead; _____0000 soldiers wounded?
Tear his clothes, throw ashes on himself, tear out his teeth like a native Hawaiian?
What is this really about, if not plain old goulishness?
Better luck next time, eh, Oliver?
You can’t handle the truth!
Frank_D Says:
June 15th, 2006 at 10:14 pm
Oliver, knock it off&
Has your life come to an end since the war in Iraq began?
Jesus H. Fucking Christ. The lives of 2,500 soldiers’ families have been shattered.
Hey, I remember the last time Bush got a good party-time guitar picture…
Roni…
I guarantee you that many if not most of those 2500 families have attended a BBQ or some other fun event (I am aware of several who did this as PART of the mourning process) since the death of their loved ones.
Life goes on, for us and for them. The war in which they died is a very legitimate subject of debate…criticism of the continued day to day lives of those back home is just silly politics.
For all thise otherwise informed — i.e., the ones who didn’t get the memo — war is not a time of mourning.
It’s not something you want, or something you glory in, but you go in and get the job done.
Americans (people you wouldn’t know about, Roni, not being one) go on with their lives when there’s a war, because they know that what the men are fighting for.
Its war. Soldiers fight in war with a remote expectation of meeting a violent end. Their service and sacrifice is a noble thing – doubly so in a democratic type state.
Most hard leftists really don’t give a gnat’s *ss about the death of these military people (most are republicans) anyway. If deaths of Americans was the huge issue, they would look first at say Los Angeles County. Bet more have died there via homicide over a three year span than in the Iraq war.
Be true to your ideals. If you believe we should never fight in any war, regardless of circumstances, thats one thing. If you believe the deaths in this war are unacceptable but that deaths in a war led by a Democratic president are more acceptable – thats another. Beside, a large number of Democrats voted to auhtorize this war.
Dugger
I’m reading the resolution now.
http://www.yourcongress.com/ViewArticle.asp?article_id=2686
No mention of Osama. Time to update the talking points!
You’re right, their service and sacrifice is a noble thing. That’s why it should never be thrown away in vain, or worse, so that some politician can tell his constituents some jerk-off self-congratulatory fantasy about what great people they are.
Bring the troops home.
“If deaths of Americans was the huge issue, they would look first at say Los Angeles County.”
Dugger when are you going to learn. In 2005 there were 846 US deaths in Iraq. In the same year there were 433 murders in LA County. So far in 2006 there have been 320 US deaths in Iraq and in LA County there have been 168 murders.
http://icasualties.org/oif/
http://www.lacountymurders.com/
The next time you want to suggest that some group of people don’t give a shit about US troops try to make sure you actually know how many US troops have actually died in Iraq. IDIOT.
Frank_D Says:
June 16th, 2006 at 9:30 am
War is not a time of mourning… they know what the men are fighting for.
Er … slam dunk stockpile of weapons of mass destruction? Capture Osama bin Laden?
Honestly, Oliver. As an amateur musician since before you were born I’ve got to say that taking pot shots at people for playing guitars in their spare time is a bit too much, even if they are Republicans.
I’ll take that bet. You’re looking at Los Angeles CITY homicide rates over the last 3 years, which averaged apx. 440 per year the past 3 years.
http://www.lapdonline.org/assets/pdf/2005_crime_summary.pdf
However, dugger clearly said Los Angeles COUNTY. The latest available year (that I can find while Googling at work) is 2002, but the numbers are significantly different:
http://coroner.co.la.ca.us/Docs/2002%20Coroner%20Annual%20Report%20Final.pdf (page 23)
You’ve got different results, frame? By all means, speak up.
There were about the same number of people killed in Vietnam (apx 58,000) as are killed every year in automobile accidents
“Bet more have died there via homicide over a three year span than in the Iraq war.”
Hey, Dugger before my above post comes out of moderation I’ll bet you that you’re an idiot. What do ya say?
Aha! The Los Angeles County Sheriff s Department website LA County Murders makes a distinction between homicides and murders, hence the lower numbers. I was using LA County stats, Save, but I misread the data. Which means Dugger is correct by semantic default. He s still an idiot and here s why:
Naturally Dugger can t refer to all the deaths in Iraq that are attributable to the war because that would require caring about the Iraqi people were there to help and he d never be able to use those statistics to distract from the horrible nightmare unfolding in that country. So instead he focuses solely on American deaths.
Only a few days ago Dugger tried to assert that more Americans were murdered in New York City each year than in Iraq. He was, of course, dead wrong. Does this dissuade him from continuing to make such meaningless comparisons? No.
When he gets his first comparison wrong he simply changes his terms and finds a different region to reference. Now its homicides, not murders, of Americans and Los Angeles County, which has a million more people than New York City. Lo and behold, he hits the jackpot.
Since Dugger wants to play games with statistics, let s play. The Los Angeles County Coroner s office calculates crime rates according the following formula: Number of Crimes/Population X 100,000 = Crime Rate http://www.laalmanac.com/crime/cr02.htm
According to this formula the homicide rate in LA County in 2003 was 10.5 (same link) with a total country population of 9 million.
Now what was the homicide rate for Americans in Iraq in 2003? That year there were 486 US deaths in Iraq. How many Americans were in Iraq in 2003? I m going to cut you guys a break and come in with a liberal estimate of 500,000 Americans. That s probably high but if someone has another number we can use that. Now, if there were 486 US deaths in Iraq in 2003 and there were half a million Americans in Iraq total that makes the homicide rate of Americans in Iraq 97.2.
Let s recap:
The homicide rate in LA County in 2003 was 10.5.
The homicide rate for Americans in Iraq in 2003 was 97.2
So Americans are dying in Iraq at a rate 9 times higher than they are in Los Angeles County.
Sweet.
I’m glad you are big enough to admit your mistake, frame. We all have to do that at times. But I made no mistake, here. I did say ‘Americans’ and I was correct and my point stands. More homicides in LA County over three year period than American military deaths in Iraq.
So if the issue is say the violent deaths of a large number of Americans, shouldn’t progresives be wearing out their Birkenstocks marching first in front of the LA County government offices instead of worrying about President of the US Bush. See, because you/they are not doing that, it suggests to some of us that you really aren’t concerned about the servicemen’s deaths at all, but at getting the hated Bush.
Dugger
“I was correct and my point stands.”
And naturally you acknowledge this fact that Americans are dying in Iraq at a rate 9 times higher than they are in Los Angeles County, right?
Because if I want to follow your idiot logic Iraq is still the place of most pressing concern because Americans are still more likely to be a victim of homicide in Iraq than they are in Los Angeles County. And you’re still an idiot.
Ah- another brilliant talking point- I’m sure that you are already cancelling any plans for Father’s Day or the Fourth of July in honor of 2500 AMERICAN MILITARY LIVES lost in Iraq.
I was wondering how you were going to exploit the next milestone to score a political swipe- predictable. If it hadn’t been a picnic, you would have found something.
PRESIDENT HAS HIS DOG’S NAILS CLIPPED AS 2500 AMERICANS LAY DEAD IN BUSH’S IMMORAL WAR.
2500 AMERICANS DEAD- BUSH EATS SCRAMBLED EGGS AND BACON FOR BREAKFAST AS IF NOTHING HAPPENED.
BUSH DROPS A ‘TWO FLUSHER’ BUT DOESN’T GIVE A CRAP THAT IRAQ IS REDDENED WITH THE BLOOD OF THE 2500TH AMERICAN CASUALTY.
Nothing like exploiting the death of soldiers to take cheap shots.
And of course, I’m sure that all the Democrats boycotted that picnic. (Well- except for Minnesota’s own Colin Peterson who was forced kicking and screaming into playing lead guitar in one of the bands.)
Oh and BTW, just the other day weren’t you pedro tag teaming on the ridiculous notion that since we’ll never end ALL violence in Iraq we shouldn’t get too worked up about the violence there at all?
Then like now your conflating violence in war with the kind of violence that every city has to deal with on a daily basis. It’s a totally dishonest way to frame the debate.
“… shouldn t progresives be wearing out their Birkenstocks marching first in front of the LA County government offices instead of worrying about President of the US Bush.”
Oh yay. I can’t wait to be attacked as anti-police.
“And naturally you acknowledge this fact that Americans are dying in Iraq at a rate 9 times higher than they are in Los Angeles County, right?”
Well, I won’t vouch for your math, but I would not be surprised if the rate of death were as you suggest. But of course, I could easily come up with another random scenario within the states that shows a higher rate over a certain period of time. My point is that the total number is much more important . And that, again, if it is the number of deaths of innocent Americans that is worried about here, as the fixation on the total number 2,500 instead of rate would clearly suggest, then the clear indication is that top priority should be here at home, not in Iraq. But then focusing on LA County wouldn’t particularly hurt Bush, would it – despite a higher death total?
Dugger
The only people who talk about how “relatively safe” Iraq is are people who are in no danger of going there. Funny how those people are the same ones who play up their own contribution to the war effort through blogging. Neither God nor history will judge your conservative culture of back patting too kindly, I’ll wager.
“But of course, I could easily come up with another random scenario within the states that shows a higher rate over a certain period of time.”
Exactly because you’re playing games with statistics to draw a comparison that is utterly misleading. When New York didn’t fly you went with Los Angeles county. When murders didn’t work, you made sure to say “homicide.” And naturally at no point are we to ever raise the spectre of innocent Iraqi deaths or that you are essentially comparing war causalties with average street crime.
Here’s the bottom line dipshit: You win an all expense paid two-week vacation to either Los Angeles County or Baghdad. Which one are you going to take?
I volunteered the first example and you b*stardized it from number of deaths to a rate. Your very basic point has been blown out of the water. If violent deaths of innocent Americans is the number one concern of progrressives (and if it isn’t, why the h*ll not?), they should forget their Bush hate and look next door to where all of those rich Hollywood airhead liberals live – Los Angeles County. Can’t your friends run their own county? More American homicides there than Iraq.
Time for Murtha to demand the immediate retreat of all Federal law enforcement official from LA County? No wait. That was unfair. Call it a strategic retreat of all federal law enforcement officials.
Dugger
“I volunteered the first example and you b*stardized it from number of deaths to a rate.”
Don’t even start, dugger. Don’t. Even. Start. You were wrong when you used New York murders as an example so you played semantics to get the result you needed. Of course we won’t mention the real deception of your comparison: that you are comparing crime statistics to war casualties. The comparison is deceptive because lowering homicide rates in large urban areas requires an array of strategies that cut across political, social and cultural arenas. All you have to do to reduce the homicide rate of Americans in Iraq to zero is GET THE FUCK OUT OF IRAQ.
Of course since you brought crime rates up, let’s check in to see how the Bush administration is doing on the crime front:
“Violent crime rates spike in US
Increase in inmates, gangs may have effect
By Dan Eggen, Washington Post | June 13, 2006
WASHINGTON — Violent crime in 2005 increased at the highest rate in 15 years, driven in large part by a surge of killings and other attacks in many Midwestern cities, the FBI reported yesterday.
The FBI’s preliminary annual crime report showed an overall jump of 2.5 percent for violent offenses, including increases in homicide, robbery, and assault. It was the first rise of any note since 2001, and rape was the only category in which the number of crimes declined.
The rise in violent offenses nationally represents the largest overall crime spike since 1991. Violent crime peaked in 1992, before beginning to plummet to its lowest levels in three decades.”
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/06/13/violent_crime_rates_spike_in_us/
Oops.
So go ahead an compare crime stats to war casualties all you want but when the stats don’t go your way don’t come whining to me. The fact of the matter is that the homicide rate for Americans in Iraq is nine times higher than it is for everyone living in Los Angeles county.
How many mortar attacks were there in Los Angeles County in the last three years? I’m going to guess zero. How many in Baghdad? Well, there were several just this afternoon:
“Also Friday, three civilians were killed and 16 others wounded during a mortar strike in a residential part of northern Baghdad around 12:20 p.m., police said.”
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/06/16/iraq.main/
Oh but silly me, we aren’t supposed to talk about Iraqi civilians being killed in a civil war because progressives only care about US casualties. But yo usee Dugger, progressives do care about more than just US casualties, we care about both US and Iraqi casualties. It should be fairly clear by now that conservatives only care about US casualties in Iraq because it allows them to ignore the full horror of what we’ve created there even as they obviously don’t think we’ve had ENOUGH US casualties. Shit, every time one of you idiots compares Iraq to WWII I get the feeling that you won’t really pay attention to what the fuck is going on until the US casualty rate hits 395,000. Of course if it ever does we’ll all have to endure endless right wing droning about how more Americans died in the Civil War than any other war so we can push the acceptable death count back another couple hundred thousand or so.
Idiot.
I think we’ve picked that nit rather thoroughly, eh?
“Nothing like exploiting the death of soldiers to take cheap shots.”
You mean like this one:
“Most hard leftists really don t give a gnat s *ss about the death of these military people”
Or how about this one:
“What is this really about, if not plain old goulishness?”
Interesting play on words, frame.
What you’re actually describing is the criticism of “exploiting the death of soldiers to take cheap shots.
Hmm let’s see, Oliver suggests that Bush doesn’t give a rat’s ass about dead troops and Dugger responds by suggesting that leftists don’t don’t a “gnat’s ass” about dead troops. (Gotta love that Dugger, he’s believes so strongly in “civil” discourse he won’t spell out “ass.” What a thoughtful guy.)
You turn around and suggest that any consideration of the number of US casaulties is ghoulish. I guess we just shouldn’t pay any attention to the numbers of people who die in this war. Or maybe we should only mark odd numbered milestones. Was that your point?
Idiots the both of you.
frameone, fuck you and the horse that rode in you.*
any consideration of the number of US casaulties is ghoulish.
Absolutely correct.
Does it bear some sort of direct relationship to “paying any attention to the number of die in this war”? No, and if you were more determined to be in the least bit reasonable, than you are obsessed with being (in your own mind) right, you would realize what a stupid, stupid statement that is.
War is not about numbers. Victory is not about numbers, and neither is defeat.
Do you know how many Iraqi combatants and terrorists from all nations have been killed by the coalition forces?
And before you run to your NYT search engine for the answer, let me tell why I’m asking.
Because you don’t know right now.
Every time we bump off 500 Islamofascist killers, it doesn’t get a write up in the press, TV or the blogosphere. Why do you suppose that is?
Try to pretend that reiterating the milestone numbers of American dead is not meant to discourage the American public, and try to pretend it doesn’t demoralize the troops.
If you can’t wrap your mind that concept, then try this one: Ever hear of cui bono?
Who benefits if we count the American dead?
Who benefits if we count the Islamofascist dead?
* If you can call me an idiot, every time I dare disagree with the One and Only frameone, then this is the automatic response you deserve.
hilarious
typical
framone
Any idea what Frank means when he said ‘fuck you and the horse that rode in you’?
Happy Father’s Day, Frank.
scratch Says:
June 16th, 2006 at 7:02 am
Roni&
I guarantee you that many if not most of those 2500 families have attended a BBQ or some other fun event (I am aware of several who did this as PART of the mourning process) since the death of their loved ones.
Life goes on, for us and for them. The war in which they died is a very legitimate subject of debate& criticism of the continued day to day lives of those back home is just silly politics.
Scratch, I understand. The families of fallen soldiers have to manage their grief any way they can and want. That said, it is presumptuous and disrespectful to ‘lump’ all affected families and family members in the “it’s war, get over your loved one’s death” frame of mind and default to auto pilot “life goes on” simply because:
Frank_D Says:
June 16th, 2006 at 9:30 am
For all thise otherwise informed war is not a time of mourning. It s not something you want, or something you glory in, but you go in and get the job done.
People don’t process loss this way simply because this is how the reason for their loss has been packaged and how it ‘should be’ understood and accepted. GWB would not recognize this calibre of hardship and sacrifice if it came up and bit him in his inarticulate ‘I’m the Decider’ ass.
roni: at long last, an intelligent, though misdirected, comment.
I wasn’t giving people a s uggestion as to how to mourn their loss. I was referring to how a nation should view a state of war — it is not the same, as say, tracking the number of fatalities after a plane crash, or a mine cave – in, where we want to know how many people “made it.”
However, many survivors of the young men and women who will never return from Iraq alive, do, indeed, console themselves with the fact that their sons, daughters, etc., died serving their country in a good cause, something only the left discourages with their execrable body counts.
Frank, just wondering … what is intellectually superior or gifted about publishing your street address on the internet in a moment of rage directed at another poster whom you admitted (to frameone) was ‘renting space in your head’ so that if he took you up on your challenge, you could demonstrate what a punk he is?
I know you won’t respond. Just thought I’d ask. Imagine if potential clients with marital problems actually found this blog …!
Frank_D Says:
June 19th, 2006 at 7:20 am
roni: at long last, an intelligent, though misdirected, comment. I was referring to how a nation should view a state of war. many survivors of the young men and women who will never return from Iraq alive, do, indeed, console themselves with the fact that their sons, daughters, etc., died serving their country in a good cause.
Frank, I understand you think you know everything there is to know about everything, given your life experience, forthcoming role as a divorced marital therapist and as a lifelong resident of this blog. As much as you feel properly equipped and knowledgeable to advise a nation … “I was referring to how a nation should view a state of war” …
… I am arguing that with regards to THIS war, uh, invasion, there are family members of fallen soldiers and many other Americans who don’t swallow the Bush Programme of Bullshit simply because. YOU are welcome to believe in the “good cause”. Many do not, and are not obligated to believe the propaganda catapulted at them simply because Bush and his band of idiots repeat it over and over and over again.
First comment: Did I say any survivors had to respond in any way?
No, I did not.
I don’t have to be smarter than everybody, or know everything.
I know I am smarter than you, and I know more than you, and that bugs the shit out of you.
As to the second comment, you are right I won’t respond to it, except for one thing: What does prowling around the Internet accumulating all that information about me, say about you?
I don’t need a Masters’ Degree in Therapy to figure that out.
Do you?
Frank_D Says:
June 20th, 2006 at 10:03 am
“I was referring to how a nation should view a state of war.”
“Did I say any survivors had to respond in any way? No, I did not.”
Whatever, Frank > . The moment someone proves you wrong, you deny asking the question.
“What does prowling around the Internet accumulating all that information about me, say about you?”
LOL … no one has to prowl, Frank. You are the only person on this blog to publish your street address after getting angry with another poster because he kicked your ass. You’re a bull in a china shop (probably heard that from your ex-wife?) and have something to say in virtually every thread so it’s not difficult to find ample proof of your abrasive, aggressive, know-it-all attitude.
I know, I know. > How are Maca, Beefa and Ricea …
“childness” should be “childishness”
no one has to prowl
Exactly. But you did,anyway.
I don’t even point out the constant errors you make in your “background checks” on me, and how the information differs from one pathological comment to the next.
I tried to point out to you that you made an intelligent comment, at last, but that wasn’t good enough for you.
The childness continues.
I will do my best to ignore you.
Frank_D Says:
June 20th, 2006 at 11:02 am
“I don t even point out the constant errors you make in your background checks on me, and how the information differs from one pathological comment to the next.”
Frank, anyone who successfully demonstrates that you’re a liar is on the receiving end of insults and denials.
“I tried to point out to you that you made an intelligent comment, at last, but that wasn t good enough for you.”
And I wished you a Happy Father’s Day.
“I will do my best to ignore you.”
I hope your typed-out-loud affirmations help you.