Vermonters Debate National Guard At War
Thanks to Glenn for the tip to this Christian Science Monitor article entitled In Vermont a town-meeting revolt over Iraq war. Obviously the self-labeled “anti-war” crowd has pushed this on to the agenda, but hey, it’s Yankee town-meeting demcoracy in action. Let them do it. Instapundit sees these debates as a potential hazard for Howard Dean. Yes, it could well be that–though I think “Mad How” disease is Mad How-ard Dean’s biggest hazard. (To see symptoms of this disease visit the DailyKos.)
The Vermont town debates over the deployment of the National Guard could be very healthy exercises in democracy– as long as the typical left-wing activist game of packing the crowd and dominating the agenda isn’t permitted. That means the pro-freedom, pro-liberty, anti-terrorist Vermonters will have to show up and confront the left-wing appeaseniks. The appeaseniks count on their “emotional engagement” (shouting, pouting and other adolescent intimidation tactics) to sway a crowd in face to face political matches such as these, but pro-liberty Vermonters can rely on the emotional engagement of the Iraqi and Lebanese people to back them up.
I’ve read about Military Families Speak Out– again, a self-named “anti-war” organization. I know we’re in Texas but if the pro-liberty, anti-terror Vermonters want a few reinforcements, they should consider inviting my wife and daughters (a military family) to speak out. In fact, I may ask my wife to guest blog on this topic– let her speak out. (I know, never volunteer your wife. But we’ll see what she says.)
As the article notes, states do not control federalized National Guard deployments, therefore these resolutions carry no legal weight. “But they have symbolic potential,” the Monitor says.
The term “anti-war” is such rot. Let’s recover the language, people. The most genuinely anti-war folks I know are war vets, and count me among that group. General Sherman had it right.
Today “anti-war” means –objectively– “anti-US military involvement in a war that involves real American interests.” It’s like human shields, that nom de guerre for leftists who show up to in Iraq to protect Saddam from American attack. On Monday Hilla could have used a human shield at the clinic the terrorists bombed.
Perhaps someone at a Vermont town-meeting will point out that the real “human shields” against terror are American soldiers.
UPDATE: Comment 4 defines the dark strategic impact of appeasenik posturing:
“… Back in the days when the same sort of quaint weirdos would try to get their towns declared ?nuclear-free zones,? that was entirely inconsequential grandstanding. But the present situation is a bit different, and there is a price to be paid for these theatrics. This silly performance will be NY Times front-page material, and those who think that blowing up passers-by is a legitimate form of political expression will surely spot it - ?See, the Americans are cracking! Just a few more bombs may do it ?? Of course those bombs won?t be in Vermont, so who cares.”
And it is frontpage news. As part of a radio interview I visited the Washington Post site this morning (see my post about GEN Abizaid’s testimony) and found an article on the Vermont town-meetings.
In politics timing is everything. This might have meant something in October or January. But after January 30, it’s just charming New Englanders and their quaint town meetings. Perhaps Karl Rove was responsible for scheduling.
Comment by Mrs. Davis — 3/1/2005 @ 7:40 pm
Hello Mr. Bay. I am delighted to view your effort to commemorate Vermont Town Meeting Day. This seems to be a popular blog item, but misconceptions abound. Fortunately, I am here to help. First let me apologize for being the center of the political universe. If it isn’t Dean screaming, it’s Leahy obstructing. Vermont is a small state for all the fracas, and we are generally a bashful people. However, we do have pride in our most democratic institution. It was no accident that Norman Rockwell illustrated a scene from a Vermont town meeting in his pictorial essay on freedom. There is no finer example of forcing government to listen to the individual citizen. I can tell you from personal experience that it is a heart-pounding thrill to be heard. But let’s not make too much of a good thing. This is about preserving a vestige of the historic process, with no particular concern about the current product. Over the years, I’ve seen town meeting resolutions against nuclear power, for solar power, against more state regulations, for making the entire state a historic preservation zone, for guns, against guns … it goes on and on. The price of free speech is having to listen to so many kooks. That’s fine–it’s only one day a year. The other 364 days, we go back to being a republic and having our slimy representatives ignore us. So relax and enjoy the show.
Comment by HelenW — 3/1/2005 @ 8:05 pm
I’m afraid it’s not just local New England color this time. Back in the days when the same sort of quaint weirdos would try to get their towns declared “nuclear-free zones,” that was entirely inconsequential grandstanding. But the present situation is a bit different, and there is a price to be paid for these theatrics. This silly performance will be NY Times front-page material, and those who think that blowing up passers-by is a legitimate form of political expression will surely spot it - “See, the Americans are cracking! Just a few more bombs may do it …” Of course those bombs won’t be in Vermont, so who cares.
Comment by big dirigible — 3/1/2005 @ 9:00 pm
” if the pro-liberty, anti-terror Vermonters” The first small step in recovering the language.
Comment by ccron — 3/1/2005 @ 10:37 pm
I dunno, I still figure that the state with the freest gun laws can’t be a _complete_ bag of vag… BTW, last time I checked, Vermont is the _only_ state besides Alaska that does _not_ require a permit for concealed carry. Alaska also still issues permits though.
Comment by Otis Wildflower — 3/2/2005 @ 3:51 am
“Freedom and Unity” are Vermont’s state motto. Let’s see if they mean it….
Comment by Dean Esmay — 3/2/2005 @ 5:53 am
Paxil
Comment by Paxil — 4/19/2005 @ 1:32 pm
mytown Vermonters Debate Nati…
Trackback by Deitrich Katarina — 7/15/2005 @ 9:10 am