Wednesday, January 3, 2007

Olbermann: Special Comment on “Sacrifice”

3,003 Dead Americans...
Bush's response to the grieving families of America:
"More to come"

Countdown with Keith Olbermann
Janaury 2, 2007

Finally tonight, a Special Comment about "Sacrifice."
If in your presence an individual tried to sacrifice an American serviceman or woman, would you intervene?
Would you at least protest?
What if he had already sacrificed 3,003 of them?
What if he had already sacrificed 3,003 of them — and was then to announce his intention to sacrifice hundreds, maybe thousands, more?
This is where we stand tonight with the BBC report of President Bush's "new Iraq strategy" and his impending speech to the nation, which it quotes a senior American official, will be about troop increases and "sacrifice."
The President has delayed, dawdled, and deferred for the month since the release of the Iraq Study Group.
He has seemingly heard out everybody… and listened to none of them.
If the BBC is right — and we can only pray it is not — he has settled on the only solution all the true experts agree, cannot possibly work: more American personnel in Iraq, not as trainers for Iraqi troops, but as part of some flabby plan for "sacrifice."
Sacrifice!
More American servicemen and women will have their lives risked.
More American servicemen and women will have their lives ended.
More American families will have to bear the unbearable, and rationalize the unforgivable — "sacrifice" — sacrifice now, sacrifice tomorrow, sacrifice forever.
And more Americans — more even than the two-thirds who already believe we need fewer troops in Iraq, not more — will have to conclude the President does not have any idea what he's doing - and that other Americans will have to die for that reason.
It must now be branded as propaganda — for even the President cannot truly feel that very many people still believe him to be competent in this area, let alone "the decider."
But from our impeccable reporter at the Pentagon, Jim Miklaszewski, tonight comes confirmation of something called "surge and accelerate" — as many as 20-thousand additional troops — for "political purposes"…
This, in line with what we had previously heard, that this will be proclaimed a short-term measure, for the stated purpose of increasing security in and around Baghdad, and giving an Iraqi government a chance to establish some kind of order.
This is palpable nonsense, Mr. Bush.
If this is your intention — if the centerpiece of your announcement next week will be "sacrifice" — sacrifice your intention, not more American lives!
As Senator Biden has pointed out, the new troops might improve the ratio our forces, face relative to those living in Baghdad (friend and foe), from 200 to 1, to just 100 to 1.
"Sacrifice?"
No.
A drop in the bucket.
The additional men and women you have sentenced to go there, sir, will serve only as targets.
They will not be there "short-term," Mr. Bush; for many it will mean a year or more in death's shadow.
This is not temporary, Mr. Bush.
For the Americans who will die because of you… it will be as permanent as it gets.
The various rationales for what Mr. Bush will reportedly re-christen "sacrifice," constitute a very thin gruel, indeed.
The former Labor Secretary, Robert Ryke, says Senator McCain told him that the "surge" would help the "morale" of the troops already in Iraq.
If Mr. McCain truly said that, and truly believes it, he has either forgotten completely his own experience in Vietnam… or he is unaware of the recent Military Times poll indicating only 38 percent of our active military want to see more troops sent… or Mr. McCain has departed from reality.
Then there is the argument that to take any steps towards reducing troop numbers would show weakness to the enemy in Iraq, or to the terrorists around the world.
This simplistic logic ignores the inescapable fact that we have indeed already showed weakness to the enemy, and to the terrorists.
We have shown them that we will let our own people be killed, for no good reason.
We have now shown them that we will continue to do so.
We have shown them our stupidity.
Mr. Bush, your judgment about Iraq — and now about "sacrifice" — is at variance with your people's, to the point of delusion.
Your most respected generals see no value in a "surge" — they could not possibly see it in this madness of "sacrifice."
The Iraq Study Group told you it would be a mistake.
Perhaps dozens more have told you it would be a mistake.
And you threw their wisdom back, until you finally heard what you wanted to hear, like some child drawing straws and then saying "best two out of three… best three out of five… Hundredth one counts."
Your citizens, the people for whom you work, have told you they do not want this, and more over, they do not want you to do this.
Yet once again, sir, you have ignored all of us.
Mr. Bush, you do not own this country!
To those Republicans who have not broken free from the slavery of partisanship — those bonded still, to this President and this Administration — and now bonded to this "sacrifice" — proceed at your own peril.
John McCain may still hear the applause of small crowds — he has somehow inured himself to the hypocrisy, and the tragedy, of a man who considers himself the ultimate realist, courting the votes of those who support the government telling visitors to the Grand Canyon that it was caused by the Great Flood.
That Mr. McCain is selling himself off to the irrational Right, parcel by parcel, like some great landowner facing bankruptcy, seems to be obvious to everybody but himself.
Or, maybe it is obvious to him — and he simply no longer cares.
But to the rest of you in the Republican Party.
We need you to speak up, right now, in defense of your country's most precious assets — the lives of its citizens who are in harm's way.
If you do not, you are not serving this nation's interests — nor your own.
Last November should have told you this.
The opening of the new Congress tomorrow and Thursday, should tell you this.
Next time, those missing Republicans, will be you.
And to the Democrats now yoked to the helm of this sinking ship, you proceed at your own peril, as well.
President Bush may not be very good at reality, but he and Mr. Cheney and Mr. Rove are still gifted at letting American troops be killed, and then turning their deaths to their own political advantage.
The equation is simple. This country does not want more troops in Iraq.
It wants fewer.
Go and make it happen, or go and look for other work.
Yet you Democrats must assume that even if you take the most obvious of courses, and cut off funding for the war… Mr. Bush will ignore you as long as possible, or will find the money elsewhere, or will spend the money meant to protect the troops, and re-purpose it to keep as many troops there as long as he can keep them there.
Because that's what this is all about, is it not, Mr. Bush?
That is what this "sacrifice" has been for.
To continue this senseless, endless war.
You have dressed it up in the clothing, first of a hunt for weapons of mass destruction, then of liberation… then of regional imperative… then of oil prices… and now in these new terms of "sacrifice" — it's like a damned game of Colorforms, isn't it, sir?
This senseless, endless war.
But it has not been senseless in two ways.
It has succeeded, Mr. Bush, in enabling you to deaden the collective mind of this country to the pointlessness of endless war, against the wrong people, in the wrong place, at the wrong time.
It has gotten many of us, used to the idea — the virtual "white noise" — of conflict far away, of the deaths of young Americans, of vague "sacrifice" for some fluid cause, too complicated to be interpreted except in terms of the very important sounding, but ultimately meaningless phrase, "the war on terror."
And the war's second accomplishment — your second accomplishment, sir - is to have taken money out of the pockets of every American, even out of the pockets of the dead soldiers on the battlefield, and their families, and to have given that money to the war profiteers.
Because if you sell the Army a thousand Humvees, you can't sell them any more, until the first thousand have been destroyed.
The service men and women are ancillary to the equation.
This is about the planned obsolescence of ordnance, isn't, Mr. Bush? And the building of detention centers? And the design of a 125-million dollar courtroom complex at Gitmo complete with restaurants.
At least the war profiteers have made their money, sir.
And we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain.
You have insisted, Mr. Bush, that we must not lose in Iraq, that if we don't fight them there we will fight them here — as if the corollary were somehow true, that if by fighting them there we will not have to fight them here.
And yet you have re-made our country, and not re-made it for the better, on the premise that we need to be ready to "fight them here," anyway, and always.
In point of fact even if the Civil War in Iraq somehow ended tomorrow, and the risk to Americans there ended with it, we would have already suffered a defeat — not fatal, not world-changing, not, but for the lives lost, of enduring consequence.
But this country has already lost in Iraq, sir.
Your policy in Iraq has already had its crushing impact on our safety here.
You have already fomented new terrorism and new terrorists.
You have already stoked paranoia.
You have already pitted Americans, one against the other.
We… will have to live with it.
We… will have to live with what — of the fabric of our nation — you have already "sacrificed."
The only object still admissible in this debate, is the quickest and safest exit for our people there.
But you — and soon, Mr. Bush, it will be you and you alone – still insist otherwise.
And our sons and daughters and fathers and mothers will be sacrificed there tonight, Sir, so that you can say you did not "lose in Iraq."
Our policy in Iraq has been criticized for being indescribable, for being inscrutable, for being ineffable.
But it is all too easily understood now.
First, we sent Americans to their deaths for your lie, Mr. Bush.
Now we are sending them to their deaths for your ego.
If what is reported is true — if your decision is made and the "sacrifice" is ordered — take a page instead from the man at whose funeral you so eloquently spoke this morning — Gerald Ford: Put pragmatism and the healing of a nation, ahead of some kind of misguided vision.
Atone.
Sacrifice, Mr. Bush?
No, sir, this is not "sacrifice." This has now become "human sacrifice."
And it must stop.
And you can stop it.
Next week, make us all look wrong.
Our meaningless sacrifice in Iraq must stop.
And you must stop it.
View the clip below:

21 comments:

Anonymous said...

One liberal nut fawning over another.

You must be one the few people who actually watch this crackpot's show

Real Truth Online said...

Shows how uninformed you are----even Newt "I hate freedom of speech" Gingrich ADMITTED Olbermann's ratings have DOUBLED. And if you think it's "NUTS" to be AGAINST sending more troops to a slaughterhouse over a LIE and not wanting more Americans to DIE--------then youre a worthless piece of shit who HATES our country AND our troops. I want them to LIVE!

Anonymous said...

Twice nothing is still nothing son

Bill O'Reilly on Fox wipes the floor with this eightball

Keith loves Nancy Grace - she keeps his show from coming in dead last in the time slot

Anonymous said...

BTW Larry, the ratings for Dec29 are as follows

Total viewers: O'Reilly had 2.318,000 Roberts on CNN had 1,117,000 Keith had a pathetic 366,000, and as I said, Nancy was last with 289,000. (But she is gaining on him)

Looks like Bill has more viewers COMBINED

Have a nice day Larry!!!

Real Truth Online said...

Just proves my point that people are sheep and dont follow the truth. You gotta bring the truth TO people----people usually dont follow truth for themselves. Besides, O'Reilly's ratings have been dropping heavily in the past year---this was even ADMITTED by Rupert Murdoch himself---the Grand Pubahh of the Neo-cons. A LOT of people watch O'reilly because they hate him too, that's why I watch 2-3 times a week, and thats not even the whole show. I watch to monitor his lies in order to inform people. See, it's not enough to just bring truth to people, you also have to take them away from the liars and you have to know what people are lying ABOUT in order to do that. Numbers dont always mean youre RIGHT. In fact, I dont even think Id like it that much if Olbermann WAS #1----because that still wouldnt tell me WHO the people ARE thats watching. Keep in mind...cable news ratings isn't the music industry. When you sell CD's, you dont care WHO buys your shit, you just want the sales. While ratings is important in TV, it is also the QUALITY of the people wacthing. In other words, for example, what if you found out 70% of O'reilly's viewers HATED him? (which Im sure in reality is probably about 40%)---would that change your view on the impact of how important numbers are? It probably wouldnt, because you're a Neo-con, bootlicking agent of the New World Order and you want our liberties and freedoms taken away and North America merged with Canada and Mexico (WHICH BUSH WANTS BY THE WAY)----anyway, Im done responding to your mindless rants (for now)---so..be gone you worthless, insignificant spec of sand that is attached to the ASS of every employee at FAUX News. You do NOTHING about your beliefs but sit in your cave or trailer park (whichever it is) and spew your un-American SHIT onto blog boards all day. You feel spewing your hatred is doing your part in the so-called "war on terror". Ironic----YOURE the terrorist!

Anonymous said...

Larry, you are one screwed up angry lib. Now people watch the shows they hate. Bill has been #1 in his time slot for years. Thanks to him, we no longer have to look at the bug eyed Phil Donahue. Bill crushed him so bad, in some markets Phil did not even register in the ratings. Not to mention his many bestsellers, that cause libs to meltdown. Like your Dead America radio network, people turn away from crackpot angry libs who have nothing constructive to say. Perhaps this why I am the only one posting here, and causing you four storkes, three heart attacks, and doubling your blood pressure. It is so much fun to do. You are so easy to toy with dipstick, and you still have nothing rational to respond with

Real Truth Online said...

No, they dont watch it BECAUSE they hate it, I TOLD YOU, if you could READ, they watch to see what SHIT he is saying---same reason why lots of people listen to Howard Stern, not because they LIKE him, because they wanna hear what he is saying. Also, kinda like the same reason you post and look at my site----obviously you hate my views, but you're STILL HERE-----kinda like that. Oh, and Im glad you made the reference to Phil Donahue----his ratings were so LOW that Bill O'Reilly had a PETITION last year to get Donahue BACK ON THE AIR! I wonder why! I KNOW why! Because Olbermann is eating him alive in the 25-54 age group. Billo may still be #1 (who cares, because like I said---MOST of O'Liar's audience is OVER 60) Olbermann has been creeping up on O'Liar's asshairs in the 25-54 age group DRASTICALLY over the past year and on some nights has BEATEN him------thats why O'Liar wants Donahue BACK! Next time you make a reference, do your research as to what reasons things are the way they are. Who said I liked or even listened to Air America? See, there you go AGAIN, spouting off more shit and wanting so DESPERATELY to put me into a classification that IM NOT IN, it makes you look like the biggest DICK on Earth. Sorry, shouldnt have said "dick"----i know that might arouse you. Sorry 'bout that. By the way, what's a "storke"? LOL.

Anonymous said...

In the 25 - 54 demographic, O'Reilly still beats Keith with no problem.

For 12/29/06 Bill had 541,000 VS Keith he had a measly 163,000

Still no real threat.
kooks like you still think Dead America failed only because the evil corportations would not air their rantings.


Like Keith, they never say anything woth listening to

Real Truth Online said...

Truth is hardly EVER accompanied by NUMBERS.

Anonymous said...

Yes, Larry why should I confuse the issue with facts

In your "mind" these numbers have been manipulated by the Bush administration. In your "reality" Keith has more viewers then O'Reilly, and this is just attempt to get Keith's show cancelled.

Real Truth Online said...

How many people go to church and believe in God compared to the population of the entire world? Not many. yet Christians claim to hold the TRUTH, do they not? If they possess the TRUTH, why isnt the entire world believers in the Christian faith? Hmm? Why? Point is, truth is not always supported by numbers. Im actually GLAD O'Reilly has more viewers, I REALLY am, it proves my point that most people are sheep. But on the other hand, stop lying---O'Liar's numbers have gone down in the past year, while Olbermann's have gone up. You never answered my question (SHOCKER)----why did O'Liar want Donahue back if Olbermann is such a failure? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm??????????????????????????????

Anonymous said...

Bill probably felt sorry for him, and Phil may have had more viewers then Keith

Not a hard thing for anyone to accomplish considering Keith's dismal numbers

Real Truth Online said...

You have to have a conscience to feel for sorry for someone. O'Liar hates Donahue----he wanted him back on because Olbermann is better and taking his viewers. That's FACT

Anonymous said...

So Bill is worried he has only 7 times as many viewers as Keith?

Real Truth Online said...

Like I said OVER and OVER, Im GLAD O' Liar beats Olbermann. O'Liar is more popular than Olbermann in the same way there are many more non-Christians than Christians. People who follow O'Liar want spin, deception and lies distorted to fit their pre-conceived ideologies. Olbermann speaks TRUTH----------not many people LIKE the truth. You're one of them.

Anonymous said...

Much like how Air America was getting more listeners, Keith is gaining more viewers

When MSNBC cuts their loses and ditches him, you will be crying how the conservatives are silencing opposing voices

Keith will continue to be a joke and MSNBC will continue to lose money

Real Truth Online said...

I dont listen to Air America----how many fucking times do you need to be told something? By the way, why wont you comment on Connally's testimony? Did he hate America too? Waiting for an answer. Your silence gives credence to it.

Anonymous said...

For once Larry you are in the majority!!!!!!!!!!

ALOT OF PEOPLE DO NOT LISTEN TO AIR AMERICA. THAT IS WHY THEY ARE BANKRUPT AND GOING DOWN FASTER THEN A BILL CLINTON INTERN!!!!!!!!

I am very happy for you son

Real Truth Online said...

I dont gives a RATS ASS about Air America-----FIND WHERE I SAID I DID CARE, AND ILL GIVE YOU A MILLION BUCKS. I see you IGNORED my comment about Connally---------TYPICAL of Mr. Dodge, Deflect and Ignore------Im just gonna call you DDI from now on.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Real Truth Online said...

Good job IGNORING Connally's testimony AGAIN. Funny how you right wing NUTS claim to have the truth and call anyone who doesnt agree NUTS, but yet, you just cant refute anything we say! As promised, DELETED.