Jerry Sprightwinger on Air America: Jane Fonda is wrong. Lets stay in Iraq

yesterday Springer, the worst radio show host in Air America, said that Jane Fonda's tour because "a lot of people are pissed off" by her Vietnam performance. He argues that she might be now called "Fallujah" fonda.
Today in a separate comment, he argued that a force is needed to keep Iraq from going to civil war.

Contact info:
http://www.springerontheradio.com/emailtheshow

because of her past actions, and not the idea behind the tour. He's right.

"Fallujah Fonda"?????

Egad. Never hand them such ammunition.

in denial.

Or give them ideas for new ones.
That's all.
And the only point I was making.

What NYCGirl said.

not make them a rightwinger. I refuse to use the same rhetoric and monolithic thinking that true rightwingers use. The ability to see nuance in an issue and to get past disgreements on specifics in order to address the bigger picture is something that we should embrace.

I completely agree with him on Fonda. She is too much of a lightning rod and her presence damages her cause.

As for the comment about Iraq and a keeping a force in Iraq. Well that's quite tough. If Iraq degenerates into civil war further than the entire region becomes destabilized. I do not believe in isolationism. I do believe that consensus at the UN should be reached before intervention.

Bring the issue back to the UN. Where it will almost definitely be determined that a peace-keeping force is needed in Iraq. Give command of this force (which will most likely be mostly American) to the UN.

period. If the Argentinians invade the US you would want themt o leave immediately. And no, Iraq is not more complicated than an Argentinian invasion to the US. It's the same, only your US is not the victim.

However, advocating a peacekeeping force to prevent civil war is not pro-occupation regardless of how you choose to view it. And please show me where I stated anything ot the sort regarding iraq/afghanistan?

he doesnt get 'it' quite a lot of the time.

and hoo-fucking-ray for jane fonda for standing up and sticking her neck out. again.
she was right the first time around and i expect she will be now.

the right wing slander assholes owe HER an apology but she will never get it. they loved vietnam and they love this war too and they will never admit it is wrong or that they are wrong.

or Randi does.

She did the right thing in opposing a horrible and wrong war. Nobody died because of her.

"just because you disagree with someone on a specific issue does not make them a rightwinger". I wish more people had that thought process. I am so tired of being given a label only because I don't agree with each and every point made on this forum. I've almost quit reading posts because so many posters think that if I don't agree to the nth degree with what they say, I am a traitor.

I also agree that Fonda's message will be overshadowed by her reputation and the focus will be on the veterans that are opposing her at every stop and not on what she attempting to communicate.

It's not his views -- most of the time I agree with him -- I think it's just his voice. For some reason, it's like nails on a chalkboard for me.

Not only because to do what is morally right, even if it was based on the bushwa *'s followers told him before * changed his excuse to that of altruism re: Iraq.

Also, if we leave Iraq the "insurgents" will destroy the oil wells. I wouldn't blame them for doing so.

Our economy is about toast anyway, so maybe we should leave.

I don't know anymore.

you enclose insurgents in quotation marks, as if implying they are terrorists. If killing Civiians (whom the pentagon calls colateral damage) is terrorism, then the US is a terrorist country,and terrorist countries shouldnt invade, let alone stay in another country.

the 'insurgents' are NOT all Iraqis fighting for their freedom.

It's sad when DU'ers do the simplistic crap that Freepland does.

There are many factions within the fight against the US occupation. Those who use terrorist bombings on civilians are TERRORISTS. They are DIFFERENT from those who fight the US with ambushes and IED's. Different tactics, different ideals, different people. Actually, after the INSURGENCY repulsed the US at Fallujah, a few foreign fighters were found killed because the Iraqi fighters didn't like some of the stuff they were doing. The Iraqi fighters hate the suicide bombers more than anyone else.

SOME are terrorists. MOST are part of the resistance. Very big difference.

but it seems he is perhaps authorizing the removal of certainbooks in the library. I am not listening too carefully. Anyone else have a different interpretation?

devil's advocate here."

The man is a Paul of Tarsus for us all...maybe not as much as say David Brock, but he is a bona fide liberal.

Having said that, I support full troop withdrawal NOW!

Nothing we can do will make it any better. We fucked it up. We should send $$$ (perhaps in the form of skimming Haliburton's profits) to Iraq and let them rebuild with our apologies.

Yesterday a caller accused Dems of being mean to Rove instead of focussing on serious issues like SS reform. Springer hemmed and hawed, said "Well, sometimes we do pile on because we really don't like Bush," and never tried to explain that we thought the charges against Rove were very serious. The guy then said "All Rove did was lie. That's not a big deal. I lie in my printing business all the time." Nothing from Springer. No, "Clinton was impeached over a lie," no "that's not what Bush supporters were saying in 2000," no "Bush promised he was the candidate who wouldn't lie, so it's an issue." He just hemmed and hawed a bit more.

I understand that he's trying to appeal to the mainstream without sounding extreme, but to me he sounded like he didn't know what he was saying, and he made it sound like we were being petty for wanting Rove brought to justice.

He's on the verge of losing me, anyway. He's not a rightwinger--that's way too extreme an accusation. But he's not being what we need.

Just MHO.

Jerry did not care for that very much either, it struck a raw nerve, as it should have.

and today it's Springer ragging on Jane? Sheesh. With Dems like them, who needs repukes???!!!!! :grr:

past actions would take the focus off of WHY THE TOUR EXISTS. He's right. He praised her past anti-Vietnam war actions (except for the stuff that she herself said she shouldn't have done).

oh wait.
We may oppose the war but not protest it, at least not in such a way that it might make a difference? At least that explains why the protests we have had so far, involving millions of people all over the world, have had so little coverage in the mainstream media.

Since when is she a spokesperson for the Democratic Party on what has to be done in Iraq? She has the right to he views but she surely doesn't speak for me.