Bush supporters' aftermath thread

That thread was abandoned because we got over our need for it -- something that doesn't appear to have happend here. I distinctly remember having to be, ahem, extra firm with some conservatives that couldn't let some of our self-indulgent posts lie without answer. Tico would remember since he was so kind as to lure said posters to this thread. That was before it was opened up. What you won't see in that thread is complaints about being challenged once it was decided to open it up. In fact, the whole tone is less nasty in general than this thread. You might want to go have a look for yourself.

Well, I kind of agree. My initial question (which I subsequently deleted, read something along the lines of, "Well, dys, as a Nam vet, what kind of car do you think I should buy: diesel or hybrid," but I thought better of it, and decided to ask a question I was actually interested in.

Thanks for your response.

As reported in the Washington Times, those opposing John Roberts can't take a joke. Of course...we know who's opposing him, so that pretty much explains it
--------------------------------------

We've come to expect zealotry on the left in the campaign to derail the nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme Court, and in the superheated partisan atmosphere prevailing in Washington it's probably unrealistic to expect good humor. These guys not only can't take a joke, they can't recognize one.
    
The Washington Post analyzed 38,000 pages of documents covering Judge Roberts' tenure as associate counsel to President Reagan (1982-85). Such a task might boggle even a nimble and well-meaning mind, but The Post concluded that its analysis demonstrated that Judge Roberts "consistently opposed legal and legislative attempts to strengthen women's rights during his years as a legal adviser in the Reagan White House, disparaging what he called 'the purported gender gap' and, at one point, questioning 'whether encouraging homemakers to become lawyers contributes to the common good.' "
    
Since "the lawyer joke" is perhaps the most widely appreciated humor in America, you might think that anyone could recognize one. This particular memorandum was written for the eyes of Linda Chavez, who was then the White House director of public liaison. She was not offended. Who would be? Well, the ladies at the National Organization for Women, where humor is taboo. When The Post sought comment in those quarters, Kim Gandy, the president of NOW, gave the expected Pavlovian response: "Oh. Wow! Good heavens! I find it quite shocking that a young lawyer, as he was at the time, had such Neanderthal ideas about women's place."
    
Mrs. Chavez, who is now the president for the Center for Equal Opportunity and a newspaper columnist who is not difficult to find, was apparently not asked what she thought then, or now. She responded, anyway: "John Roberts' comment in that one memorandum ... was obviously a joke at the expense of lawyers, not a sexist slam. It is ludicrous to suppose that Mr. Roberts would make a sexist remark to the person who was, after all, then the highest ranking woman on the White House staff -- and a working mom to boot."
    
White House spokesman Steve Schmidt was, in fact, allowed to remark that the remark was "a lawyer joke," but only in the 18th paragraph of The Post's "analysis." The campaign to Bork the nominee is not gaining altitude, and humorlessness may be the only weapon available to NOW, The Post and whomever else can be recruited for the shootout. But dueling with pop-guns loaded with blanks won't make a very interesting fight.

http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20050823-091720-1145r.htm

JW, That was ice cold water thrown over my head; didn't know Mr Rboerts was a gender bigot. Too bad, I thought he was one of the good guys. When Bush nominated him, I should'a known something was amess.

This from the guy who callously showed pictures of women Middle Eastern women golfing in response to horrible stories of ritualistic abuse of Islamic women and girls.

Yeah, nobody's buying your "outrage" or theirs. All politically expedient and fake.

The whole point of the story was that the radical Left has no sense of humor. God, I get sick of the political correctness stuff that doesn't allow anybody to say anything for fear of offending somebody. (I also hope this doesn't trigger a whole string of lawyer jokes. )

LOL c.i. He wasn't bashing women...he was bashing lawyers. I've been reading some of what he wrote back in the 80's (the NYTimes has a great collection in an 8/17 article). I'll see if I can find it again and post it.

No sense of humor?!? "Political correctness stuff"?!?

OK...here it is. The "lighter" side of John Roberts I enjoyed reading some of his "snarkier" comments (culled from those boxes and boxes of documents from his Reagan years). Of course, I personally think he should be confirmed unanimously for his stance on Michael Jackson, LOL.

August 17, 2005


Nominee's Letters From 80's Show a Lighter Side of Work

By SCOTT SHANE
WASHINGTON, Aug. 16 - The reporters who have been poring over mountains of documents from Judge John G. Roberts Jr.'s past since his nomination to the Supreme Court are searching for intriguing tidbits, hints at his 20-year-old views on abortion and affirmative action.

But those rare morsels, which have repeatedly become headlines, float in a sea of far more mundane material, the daily labors of a junior lawyer in the White House in the mid-1980's.

What the young Mr. Roberts more routinely faced was the likes of Ramon L. Rivera, who surfaced in the latest batch of 5,400 pages of documents released this week.

Mr. Rivera wrote to the White House in September 1984 to inform the nation's leaders that he had learned that "all property in the U.S. has been placed in a trust." He followed up with 30 questions about this mysterious trust, including, "Why has this been kept a secret from we the people?"

It fell to Mr. Roberts, the summa cum laude graduate of Harvard and a standout at Harvard Law School, the erudite and ambitious former Supreme Court clerk, to set straight Mr. Rivera, of Los Angeles ("Where else?" was Mr. Roberts's exasperated aside in his memorandum on the matter).

"Please be advised that all property in the United States has not, in fact, been placed into a trust," Mr. Roberts wrote in a letter to be sent over the signature of his boss, Fred F. Fielding, counsel to President Ronald Reagan. "I do not know where you would have gotten such an idea."

He was less abrupt with a woman from Monrovia, Calif., who wrote a chatty belated Christmas card in February 1986 weighing in on "the Libyan situation" and proposing that Nancy Reagan run for president in 1988.

"She is well qualified and well liked by the voters if she dresses modestly," the writer, Mildred Muir, advised.

Mr. Roberts replied tactfully in a full-page letter over his own signature, "Mrs. Reagan has not expressed any interest in elective office, though I am certain she appreciates your expression of support."

No correspondent was too obscure to merit a reply, recalled Peter J. Rusthoven, who worked alongside Mr. Roberts for three years in the 80's as one of six lawyers with the title associate White House counsel. "We tried to give everybody a response," Mr. Rusthoven said.

Mr. Rusthoven, now a lawyer in Indianapolis, said the work was distinguished by the hourly alternation of the momentous and the trivial.

"In a day," he said, "you might work on a very important case from the Justice Department with serious policy implications. And then later, you'd be looking over the draft of a National Peach Month proclamation to make sure the subjects and verbs agreed and that it didn't go overboard on the merits of the peach."

Drafting replies to enthusiastic or confused citizens - or noncitizens like the African tourist who scrawled a complaint over 12 pages of motel stationery - was a staple of the position. Another, the documents show, was ruling on what gifts the president might safely accept.

A book, "Fluoride: The Aging Factor," passed legal muster, Mr. Roberts decided, despite the author's contention that fluoridation of public water supplies was "chronically poisoning over half of the population of the United States." So did a nostalgic still-life by a constituent of Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, even though it depicted a can of Calumet baking powder.

"The painting hardly constitutes a commercial endorsement of Calumet baking powder, any more than Andy Warhol's Campbell's soup can did of Campbell's soup," Mr. Roberts wrote. "The can is depicted not because of the attributes of Calumet baking powder, but because the can, at least to the artist, evokes a bit of Americana."

Another day found the future Supreme Court nominee advising whether there was a legal problem with helping the Peanuts production of "This Is America, Charlie Brown" at the White House. Mr. Roberts gave his approval, but with a firm caveat that the president should turn down an invitation to appear with Charlie and Snoopy in the final scene.

"In sum," he wrote, "I must recommend against this proposed return to the president's previous career."

In the dusty boxes of documents are occasional glimpses of Judge Roberts's humor, with which Mr. Rusthoven said all the White House lawyers tried to leaven the drudgery of 60-hour workweeks.

In 1984, Mr. Roberts twice wielded his wit to stop other White House staff members from writing letters for Mr. Reagan lauding Michael Jackson for charitable work.

"I recognize that I am something of a vox clamans in terris in this area, but enough is enough," he wrote in a memorandum in June 1984, using the approximate Latin for "voice crying in the wilderness." He added, "The Office of Presidential Correspondence is not yet an adjunct of Michael Jackson's P.R. firm."

Three months later, Mr. Roberts was batting away a new request. "I hate to sound like one of Mr. Jackson's records, constantly repeating the same refrain, but I recommend that we not approve this letter." He noted that a press report said that some young fans were turning from Mr. Jackson "in favor of a newcomer who goes by the name 'Prince.' "

Mr. Roberts asked, "Will he receive a presidential letter?"

The next year, Mr. Roberts was consulted about a plan to have the president write St. Patrick's Day greetings to the Irish ambassador under a special letterhead reading "An Teach Ban," Gaelic for "The White House."

Mr. Roberts had no legal objection. But he strongly advised that the translation be verified. "For all I know it means 'Free the I.R.A.,' " he added, referring to the Irish Republican Army.

Source

I still remember one piece in which a Left wing lady commented on Condi Rice's appointment as Secretary of State: "She doesn't seem to be very feminine." To which Peggy Noonan replied: "Neither does Colin".

Would you look at that! PDiddie photoshopped Rush's head on a self portrait! Nice work diddie!

Do you think this guy is right? There is a massive backlash building to the anti-war protesters? Lord, I hope so as it will ensure a victory in Iraq. I think if they are loud enough and vocal enough it will greatly shorten the process too.

Excerpt



Ghost Busters
A quest majority replaces Vietnam's "silent majority."
BY DANIEL HENNINGER
Friday, August 26, 2005 12:01 a.m. EDT

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" is an aphorism of uncertain truth everyone seems to have etched into their minds. Who can forget? From the sound of the "antiwar" tom-toms thumping across the land, forgetting the past is the one thing America doesn't have to worry about. We routinely open the sepulchers of memory, and just now it is the "ghost of Vietnam" that is strolling among us.

Gary Hart, a former Democratic senator from Colorado who ran for president twice and worked on the McGovern campaign, published an op-ed in the Washington Post this week in which he exhorted someone in his party to actively oppose Mr. Bush on the war--to "jump on the hot stove" of Iraq, notwithstanding the Democrats' searing experience with Vietnam.

Chuck Hagel, a senator from Nebraska and current presidential marathoner, is beating his singular path to the nomination by explicitly saying that as in Vietnam, we are "bogged down" in Iraq and "need to be out." Also on the yellow brick road to the presidency, Democratic senator Russ Feingold has called for withdrawal from Iraq by Dec 31, 2006

Maybe Santayana was misquoted. Maybe what he meant to say is those who remember history are condemned to repeat it. And repeat it, and repeat it.

Joan Baez, now 64, has descended from the mists to sing songs at Cindy Sheehan's Crawford ditch in Texas. Mick Jagger and Keith Richards, respectively 62 and 61, have decided to cap their careers with a new song called "Sweet Neo-Con" ("It's liberty for all . . . unless you are against us, then it's prison without trial.") The ghost of Tom Hayden showed up on Bill O'Reilly this week to announce, with the confidence of experience, that "an exit strategy is an art form all in itself." And indeed some polls have dropped the war's support below 50%.

Here's a truer saying: It's déjà vu all over again.

Any politician aspiring to the presidency who gets the call wrong on the Iraq war may find himself in the ditch George McGovern dug for his party in 1972--with 37.5% of the vote. Perhaps the reason Democrats like Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden aren't jumping in front of Cindy's parade is that as a matter of species survival they're required to keep an ear to the ground. And you know what, the times really have changed since Vietnam.

Richard Nixon, amid a similar low ebb of popularity with Vietnam, gave a famous speech in 1969. This was the year after the Tet offensive, which caused Walter Cronkite's famous Hagel-like throwing in of the towel. In that speech Nixon described a "great silent majority" in America. The idea, of course, was that the daily media attention commanded by the antiwar movement was missing a class of Americans who sat home seething at the behavior of the protesters.

Today, because of the Internet, no one has to seethe in silence, as wired activists in both parties proved in 2004's high-tech election, and now. But it may be that the current infatuation with anti-Bush, anti-Iraq sentiment is again missing a political current flowing beneath the surface of the news, just as the media missed the silent majority 40 years ago and the values voters in the 2004 election.

I would call this faction the Quiet Majority. These people are organized and they are pro-active. But they pass beneath our politics unnoticed because they're about something deeper than TV face-time. There is a large number of groups that have organized in the past three years solely to support the American troops in Iraq.

• Bill Robie recently drove three hours from Atlanta to Camp Lejeune, N.C., to help Jim Hake's Spirit of America--which has nearly 14,000 supporters--load school supplies bound for Iraq. "Groups like SoA, Home for Our Troops, Operation Homefront, Fisher House and others don't get much attention," he wrote me a few days ago, "yet they represent the true character of our nation."

• John Folsom is a Marine Reserve colonel from Nebraska, now in Iraq. Two years ago he "passed the hat" among colleagues and raised money to create Wounded Warriors, which supports military hospitals by buying laptops for bedridden soldiers, TVs and overhead projectors for medical staff. His support base is small. "It's almost like a family," he told me.

• Soldiers' Angels was started in 2003 by Patti Patton-Bader, the mother of a sergeant in Iraq then. It now has 45,000 members. Its executive director, Don MacKay, says: "Our members come from across the political spectrum. But there is one opinion they all share: Our soldiers deserve every ounce of support we can muster."

The message boards some of these groups maintain make clear that troops are aware, in detail, of antiwar activity. Again, this isn't Vietnam. They have news access. If the Democratic left does levitate another antiwar movement, it won't be the unanswered opposition of the Vietnam years. The counter-opposition will draw numbers from these pro-troop groups. They, too, are Internet-linked. They are better informed than most people, they are committed, and they are articulate. And they have stories to tell.

Does this add up to millions of pro-Iraq voters? Who knows? But the quiet, mostly nonpartisan, pro-G.I. activism of these people has put them closer to the reality of the war--its pain, its losses, its successes and kinships. My guess is their kind of support is what the troops on the front want most now, rather than having to sit along the Euphrates River wondering if Chuck Hagel, Russ Feingold and the Rolling Stones are going to pull the rug from under them over the next two years.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/dhenninger/?id=110007167

Except for the simple fact that Bush's rating on Iraq is below forty percent:

Protesters Will Follow Bush War Tour
Reuters

Monday 22 August 2005

Crawford, Texas - President Bush, trying to counter the message of anti-war vigils outside his ranch and growing public discontent with Iraq, leaves Texas on Monday for the first of two speeches on the war and the September 11 attacks, but more protesters await him.

Bush, appearing at a Veterans of Foreign Wars convention in Salt Lake City, will weigh in on attempts by Iraqis to meet a deadline for a draft constitution and may reiterate his stay-the-course message to Americans who are increasingly uneasy about his handling of Iraq.

At a park near the VFW venue, Celeste Zappala, 58, the Philadelphia mother of a National Guardsman killed in Iraq, plans to lead a protest. Her son Sherwood Baker was killed in Iraq last year and she is part of anti-war mother Cindy Sheehan's group, Gold Star Families for Peace.

Baker was killed while assigned to the Iraq Survey Group, which was on the hunt for stockpiles of illicit weapons but concluded they were never there.

"We all know that noble cause for war that Bush talks about has changed several times," Zappala said.

Her theme will be similar to that of Sheehan, the Vacaville, California, mother whose son Casey was killed in combat in Iraq. Sheehan has become a magnet for anti-war sentiment by camping out near Bush's ranch and demanding to talk face-to-face with the president.

"We want to meet with him. We have questions to ask him," Zappala said.

Sheehan's group is also airing television ads in Salt Lake City accusing Bush of having lied about Iraq. One station, an ABC affiliate, is refusing to air the ads.

Bush, who has ruled out a near-term pullout from Iraq, on Saturday cited the upcoming fourth anniversary of the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States and said Iraq was a cause worth fighting for.

"Our troops know that ... if we do not confront these evil men abroad, we will have to face them one day in our own cities and streets, and they know that the safety and security of every American is at stake in this war," he said in his weekly radio address.

Bush went to war in Iraq in 2003 warning of a threat from stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. None were found.

Critics say Iraq had nothing to do with the September 11 attacks and that the administration has tried to tie Iraq to terrorism since the war to justify its actions.

After Salt Lake City, Bush will go to Idaho for two days. He will speak on the war on terror there on Wednesday before resuming his vacation at his Crawford, Texas, ranch.

Sunnis rally against Iraq charter
Thousands of Sunni Muslims have demonstrated in the Iraqi city of Baquba to protest against the draft constitution being debated in Baghdad.
Some carried pictures of Iraq's Sunni former leader, Saddam Hussein.

The Sunnis object to several parts of the draft text agreed by Shia and Kurdish parties. But Shia leaders have said they will compromise no further.

It has emerged that US President George Bush phoned a Shia leader earlier this week urging him to seek consensus.

Mr Bush spoke to Abdul Aziz al-Hakim and "asked him to be more flexible with regard to Sunni demands," sources close to the ruling Shia alliance told Reuters.

'Final offer'

The Sunni marchers in Baquba danced and sang chants glorying Saddam Hussein, the deposed Iraqi leader who held onto power through a series of bloody crackdowns on the country's Shia and Kurdish communities.

"Bush, Bush, listen well: We all love Saddam Hussein!" sang some of the marchers, according to Reuters news agency.

The protesters also accused the US-backed government in Baghdad of promoting the interests of Iraq's Shia neighbour, Iran.

Placards in the procession proclaimed opposition to provisions in the constitution that the protesters claim would lead to the federalisation - and ultimate disintegration - of Iraq.

Sunni leaders have rejected the constitutional text drawn up by the Kurdish and Shia groups who hold a big majority of seats in the Iraqi parliament.

The outstanding issues from the Shia-Kurdish draft include:


federalism, and the way to form semi-autonomous regions

the terminology used in eradicating the influence of the former Baath regime - whether to use the term Baath party or Saddam's Baath

structuring of authority between the presidency, parliament and the government.

CONSTITUTION SCHEDULE
15 August deadline extended twice
National referendum on constitution by mid-October
Full government elections by mid-December
Most computers will open PDF documents automatically, but you may need to download Adobe Acrobat Reader.

Monday's deadline for agreement was extended until Thursday - and passed without a breakthrough.

Talks with Sunni leaders are continuing, although on Friday a top Shia official, Abbas al-Bayati, said Shias had made their "final proposals", including concessions on both federalism and the Baath Party.

He would not go into detail, but said "we cannot offer more than that".

Friday also saw Shias rallying in cities across southern Iraq to show their support for the radical cleric Moqtada Sadr and to demand the government improve public services.

Sunni isolation

The speaker of Iraq's parliament, Hajim al-Hassani, said whatever the outcome, the text would go to a referendum in October.

Shias and Kurds could approve the document in parliament without Sunni backing.

But the insurgency rocking Iraq has its roots in the Sunni heartlands and the constitution is supposed to be part of the process of winning the Sunni community round, the BBC's Baghdad correspondent Mike Wooldridge says.


Sunnis have expressed concerns that allowing for federalism may lead to the creation of an autonomous Shia area in southern Iraq - like the Kurdish north but under Iran's influence.

The Sunnis fear greater autonomy for the Kurdish north and Shia south could compromise their share of revenues from those oil-rich regions.

Sunni negotiator Saleh al-Mutlaq said one suggestion of delaying any new federal regions for two years was unacceptable to them and at the moment he believed there was no prospect of consensus.

The US has announced it is sending another 1,500 troops to Iraq to bolster security before the referendum on the constitution, due in October.

In that vote, Sunnis could block the constitution by delivering a two-thirds "No" vote in three of Iraq's 18 provinces.

That would mean parliament's dissolution and fresh elections in December.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/4188112.stm

Published: 2005/08/26 15:46:53 GMT

© BBC MMV

And this on another a2k forum:

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=57434&start=370

soldier's family grieves while seething at military brass
A Madison soldier's family grieves while seething at military brass
'One wound after another'
By Steven Elbow
August 24, 2005
Madison State Journal

Every time the wound begins to heal at Ray and Diane Maida's house, something comes along to rub salt into it.

First came news that their son, Mark Maida, a 22-year-old Army sergeant, was killed in Iraq by a roadside bomb on May 26. Then, a week after his death, the Army gave only hours' notice that the body would be arriving at Gen. Mitchell International Airport in Milwaukee, forcing the grieving family into a frantic scramble to retrieve it for a funeral two days later.

Letters and packages to Mark from home arrived for a time almost daily, marked "Return to sender." Then a slow trickle of possessions arrived from Iraq and his unit's base at Fort Irwin, Calif. To top it off, despite repeated efforts, Army officials failed to provide details of Mark's death. More than two months later, the Maidas finally got the details of his death, not from the Army, but from the Washington Post.

"It's just been one wound after another," Diane said. "And just about the time you think you're on the upswing, then you get shut down again with another incident."

For the Maidas, pain from the loss of their son has been compounded by countless snafus. Ray said an Army official even admitted, unofficially, that the Army lacked a proper protocol for dealing with the families of dead soldiers.

It's part and parcel of what Ray sees as a pervading ineptitude in conducting the war and the military's inability to protect its troops.

"They can take a $1 million missile and put it up some Iraqi's ass and they can't tell me what time my son's coming in?" Ray fumed. "This is why my son's dead, this total incompetence."

On Aug. 12, the Maidas finally found the information the Army wouldn't provide. Ray's daughter, Juliann, learned of a Washington Post article that ran two days earlier in which Terry Rodgers, a soldier and good friend of Mark's, recounts his last moments and his last words.

"I went online and began to read it and I had to stop," said Ray, pausing, his eyes welling up. "I just started crying, you know? I guess it changed my picture or the dreams I had. That one I wake up to in the morning, that picture changed."

Reluctant warrior: Mark Maida graduated from Memorial High School in 2001, a few months before the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11.

"Mark wasn't about the military, but he was in the military," Ray said. "After 9/11, because he wasn't going to go to college, he thought he'd do his service."

He was also motivated by a sense of duty that echoed back for generations. Both of his grandfathers served in WWII and his father, a retired Madison detective, was a combat veteran in Vietnam. Mark's older brother, Chris, had been in the Marines since 1999.

Shortly before his three-year stint was up on Nov. 1, 2004, Mark applied for an early release from Fort Irwin to attend school - a common request - but Mark's unit mishandled his paperwork until it was too late, Ray said. His unit was deployed to Iraq and, although Mark only had a month to serve out his time, a military "stop-loss" order kept him in uniform until his unit was to return to its home base at Fort Irwin.

"Of course Mark was upset by that," Ray said. "But Mark didn't raise hell. He didn't protest and followed orders."

In Iraq, he became disillusioned.

Mark and his fellow soldiers patrolled trouble spots, often looking for insurgents planting roadside bombs. Although Mark was trained as a gunner on a Bradley fighting vehicle, the soldiers typically traveled in Humvees, which insurgents have been remarkably successful in blowing up.

"He's in Iraq and he's serving and he's getting frustrated, frustrated at the incompetence of leadership," Ray said. "He didn't feel he was accomplishing what America was saying was being accomplished."

But he had a sense of obligation to his fellow soldiers that outweighed his aversion to the military.

At a memorial service in Iraq captured on video, Spc. Shawn Klock, Mark's roommate for two years, said "he didn't like the military, but he did his job to the best of his ability because he loved his friends and family."

Maida could have challenged his deployment, Klock said. Others had. He could have gotten out and followed his dreams of going to college and one day buying a Harley and cruising across the country. In Madison he had a girlfriend, Elizabeth Jacobs, and they planned to get married.

"I asked him one time why he did not fight harder to get his (discharge), and he told me 'I could not live with myself if I knew that one of you guys got hurt and I was not there to help you,'" Klock said. "He chose to take this deployment because of the love he had for his friends."

Stateside, Mark's family and girlfriend contacted U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold after his deployment, asking for a review of the stop-loss order that was keeping Mark in Iraq. Mark didn't want to be involved, but something in Feingold's response to a letter from his girlfriend changed his mind.

Feingold's letter said the senator had concerns about stop-loss. But he indicated that the Army was applying the policy across the board, retaining deployed soldiers who have met their contractual obligations as well as those who were scheduled to retire.

Mark, who had just seen his sergeant major get discharged for retirement, fired off a letter to Feingold dated May 18, eight days before his death.

"I am curious how this can be if 2/11 ACR (Mark's armored cavalry regiment) is still under stop-loss orders," he wrote. "My original (discharge) date was 31 October, 2004 and I'm still here. I feel very unappreciated. What are they trying to say? That the three years I gave my country wasn't enough? I don't care if he did do 20-plus years, he's in the same army I'm in."

He added, "There are many soldiers in this unit in the same situation and would all be grateful if you could help us get out of this bad situation."

Fearing that a letter addressed to a U.S. senator might arouse suspicion, Mark sent the letter to his parents to make sure Feingold got it.

Feingold's office did not return inquiries about whether there was an investigation of Maida's complaint.

Mark's legacy: When speaking of the stop-loss policy, which he considers a back-door draft, and his family's attempts to get Mark home, Ray's voice rises.

"Mark would want to pursue people's knowledge about stop-loss, that there are kids being kept in," he said, "that there's this, what I call involuntary servitude, that we fought the Civil War to stop."

He also said Mark would want people to know about a military that is needlessly placing its soldiers in jeopardy, particularly by putting them in Humvees, the bombing of which are now claiming the bulk of U.S. casualties.

Ray said he is encouraged by Cindy Sheehan, who also lost a son to the war and whose anti-war vigil at President Bush's vacation home in Crawford, Texas is putting pressure on the administration to answer some questions about how the war is being conducted.

"I respect Mrs. Sheehan for wanting to get the message out," Ray said. "It took Mrs. Sheehan driving to Crawford, Texas and sitting at the gate of Bush's vacation home to get the message out, 'Are we telling the truth about the protection of the troops?'"

Ray and Diane said Mark's death has motivated them to speak out about the government's failure to provide adequate equipment for soldiers in Iraq.

"When it comes to equipment, supplies, he would want to let the world know that they weren't adequately equipped," Ray said.

While Mark's death could raise awareness about the incompetence that led to his death, Ray said his legacy is unlikely to include a successful venture in Iraq.

"History will tell us what he did for Iraq and its people," he said. "We don't know right now. Some of us are speculating that we have destroyed Iraq. Some are speculating that we've given them this newfound desire for freedom. I hope his legacy is that spark of freedom. I don't see it, but I hope that's it."

Supporting the troops? If there's one thing that galls the Maidas, it's the endless parade of bumper sticker ribbons.

"Do you know what my government's not doing to support the troops?" Ray said. "I want people to know the lack of respect and the folly of 'We Support Our Troops.'"

Mark's brother, Chris, 24, was a Marine, serving only 10 miles from Mark's unit, although they never saw each other in Iraq. After several of his friends died from being blown up in their Humvees, Chris made it home safely on April 1.

"It's a glamorized pickup truck," he said. "We're riding around in Humvees that obviously aren't strong enough to withstand an IED (improvised explosive device) blast. Myself and all the Marines were pissed we were put in this position."

When he found out that Mark was patrolling in a Humvee, not a Bradley, Chris' first instinct was to try to save his brother.

"Chris, the week before Mark died, he was begging him, begging him not to get into Humvees," Ray said.

Chris later recounted the conversation.

"'Tell them you refuse, you know, it's not worth your life,'" Chris remembered telling Mark over the phone.

Chris said the reason troops in Iraq are patrolling in Humvees instead of fighting vehicles is the cost, which makes many soldiers feel like they are expendable.

"If they feel the troops are worth it, why not spend the money?" he said. "It's human life. You can't put a price on it, so I don't see why they're putting them in this position."

Now Chris has a college degree and works in Milwaukee as a counselor for troubled girls. But he is hounded by his experiences in Iraq - the dead friends, the loss of his little brother and the guilt of having survived.

"I felt like I shouldn't have left if he was over there," he said. "Not only that, you see a lot of innocent civilians die, and that really screws your head up. I've lost a lot in this war, and I've seen a lot of bad things. I don't know if I've seen enough good over there to feel it's justified."

Of Chris, Ray said, "Physically, he's intact. But he lost his buddies and he lost his brother. So I sacrificed two sons to this war. At least the people in charge should let me know what the sacrifice was about, what my son was doing when he was killed."

House of pain: The grief at the Maida's spacious duplex on Madison's far southeast side is palpable. Ray and Diane have three remaining children, Juliann, 32, Aaron, 29, and Chris, which helps. They are extremely tight-knit.

But Mark's death still weighs heavily in the air.

Several boxes were recently delivered to the Maidas - Mark's belongings from Fort Irwin, which the Army had initially told them didn't exist. They remain in the garage, unopened.

"I know what's in them," Ray said. "I helped him pack them."

A picture of Mark in desert camouflage, which was displayed during his unit's memorial for him in Iraq, sits on a counter in the kitchen. Diane's eyes linger on it when she passes.

"Just when you think things are starting to get normal, all of a sudden it's another dip in the roller-coaster ride," she said. "That's made the healing process more difficult for us - those repeated wounds. Like his belongings coming back from Iraq one week, then the next week another set of belongings coming back, then there's this article in the Washington Post that we didn't know was coming out."

The last wound, they maintain, could have been averted if someone from the Army - someone who knew Mark and could tell them what happened - had called.

"Mrs. Sheehan wants to talk to the president a second time," Ray said. "I just want to talk to a lowly officer in a company level command or a battalion level command."

While seeing the story of his son's death in print was a shock, Ray and Diane are beginning to see it as a blessing.

"We finally said, well, it does reinforce the fact that he wasn't still alive in that helicopter suffering on the way to Baghdad with Terry Rodgers," Ray said. "And so, you know, it helps."

BBB, I'm sure this is not an isolated incident. Our governmetn not only fails our soldiers with not providing proper equipment to fight the war, but takes away their benefits after they return home with injuries. Not surprising these neocons don't give a rat's ass about the families or veterans.

If soldiers want to support this administration, that's their right - although I don't understand any of it.

I never knew that BBB, c.i., and Pdiddie were Bush supporters! This is great! So glad you're here!