Michael Berg
June 20, 2006 1:21 PM Subscribe
"Shortly before Father’s Day, TAP spoke with Michael Berg, father of Nicholas Berg, about his congressional campaign and the recent death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi." [Via Disinformation.]
CCK: I thought you meant the interviewer was an idiot, but after reading the Prospect interview I now think you are referring to Berg.
For instance:
I was asked to run as a Democrat and I turned it down. … What message would they let me dare? They wouldn’t let me say end the war immediately. They wouldn’t let me say … universal health care for everyone now. They wouldn’t let me say let’s spend some money on education, let’s spend some money on Social Security. Let’s stop spending money on war and fix the infrastructure of this country. Let’s give everyone a livable wage and let’s stop wasting our planet through global warming -- they wouldn’t let me say any of these things, so what would be the use of running for them?
Is this guy serious?
posted by Pacheco at 2:02 PM on June 20, 2006
For instance:
I was asked to run as a Democrat and I turned it down. … What message would they let me dare? They wouldn’t let me say end the war immediately. They wouldn’t let me say … universal health care for everyone now. They wouldn’t let me say let’s spend some money on education, let’s spend some money on Social Security. Let’s stop spending money on war and fix the infrastructure of this country. Let’s give everyone a livable wage and let’s stop wasting our planet through global warming -- they wouldn’t let me say any of these things, so what would be the use of running for them?
Is this guy serious?
posted by Pacheco at 2:02 PM on June 20, 2006
I love how Soledad said there is an alternative belief that after enough bombings and civilian deaths, ordinary Iraqis will really start to feel a sense of ownership of their country and the importance of democracy.
posted by overanxious ducksqueezer at 2:05 PM on June 20, 2006
posted by overanxious ducksqueezer at 2:05 PM on June 20, 2006
Are YOU serious? He's exactly right! The mainstream Democratic Party machine does actively block anyone with that progressive an agenda.
posted by stenseng at 2:07 PM on June 20, 2006
posted by stenseng at 2:07 PM on June 20, 2006
Yea, those are all issues that most Democrats don't really like to talk about for fear of being accused of being "liberal".
posted by octothorpe at 2:10 PM on June 20, 2006
posted by octothorpe at 2:10 PM on June 20, 2006
I wonder what Michael Berg has to say about the almost-too-incredible-to-ponder encounter between his son and the "20th hijacker" Zacarias Moussaoui.
posted by nevercalm at 2:17 PM on June 20, 2006
posted by nevercalm at 2:17 PM on June 20, 2006
spend money on education? universal health care? livable wage? global warming? Watch CSPAN and you'll hear Democrats frequently discuss these issues.
posted by Pacheco at 2:17 PM on June 20, 2006
posted by Pacheco at 2:17 PM on June 20, 2006
issues that most Democrats don't really like to talk about for fear of being accused of being "liberal"
strange how that poor man refused to drink Zarqawi's rotting blood on national TV for the sake of the NEVAR FORGET crowd's sense of self-worth. how dare he talk like a pacifist. pacifism is unpatriotic, just like cut-and-run.
and how sweet to hear some clueless TV robot having the gall to lecture a man who had to watch the footage of his son being slaughtered like a sheep. how dare he avoid the "I want them dead or alive" thing -- doesn't he know how to grieve on CNN?
and how dare he run as a Green. but then, maybe one day Fitzgerald will magically bail them out of their pathetic political impotence and indict, you know, somebody, and by magic then the Democrats will finally start winning again. or something.
posted by matteo at 2:21 PM on June 20, 2006
strange how that poor man refused to drink Zarqawi's rotting blood on national TV for the sake of the NEVAR FORGET crowd's sense of self-worth. how dare he talk like a pacifist. pacifism is unpatriotic, just like cut-and-run.
and how sweet to hear some clueless TV robot having the gall to lecture a man who had to watch the footage of his son being slaughtered like a sheep. how dare he avoid the "I want them dead or alive" thing -- doesn't he know how to grieve on CNN?
and how dare he run as a Green. but then, maybe one day Fitzgerald will magically bail them out of their pathetic political impotence and indict, you know, somebody, and by magic then the Democrats will finally start winning again. or something.
posted by matteo at 2:21 PM on June 20, 2006
I wonder what Michael Berg has to say about the almost-too-incredible-to-ponder encounter between his son and the "20th hijacker" Zacarias Moussaoui.
Also: Michael Moore interviewed Nick Berg when he was working on Fahrenheit 9/11.
posted by sonofsamiam at 2:23 PM on June 20, 2006
Also: Michael Moore interviewed Nick Berg when he was working on Fahrenheit 9/11.
posted by sonofsamiam at 2:23 PM on June 20, 2006
It's interesting that in referring to his son's death they use the term "killer", but when referring to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's death they use the term "murder".
posted by Rusty Iron at 2:39 PM on June 20, 2006
posted by Rusty Iron at 2:39 PM on June 20, 2006
No Rusty, that's not interesting, at all.
posted by gsb at 2:45 PM on June 20, 2006 [1 favorite]
posted by gsb at 2:45 PM on June 20, 2006 [1 favorite]
Maybe I should explain the reason I find it interesting. I don't think the term "kill" invokes the same meaning at "murder". Murder carries more weight. It implies an illegal act, where as "kill" strikes me as a something more biological.
So than, why is it that that they would say that Nick Berg was "killed", but Zarqawi was "murdered"?
I'm by no means a conservative, but I can't see the sense in forgiving somebody for something they have expressed no regret over.
posted by Rusty Iron at 3:07 PM on June 20, 2006
So than, why is it that that they would say that Nick Berg was "killed", but Zarqawi was "murdered"?
I'm by no means a conservative, but I can't see the sense in forgiving somebody for something they have expressed no regret over.
posted by Rusty Iron at 3:07 PM on June 20, 2006
They use both but defer to Berg. And yeah, it is weird. I have mixed feelings about Berg; I admire his principals and willingness to forgive, but sometimes he sounds like a caricature, especially when he starts talking about Bush. Still, I find anyone speaking of forgiveness refreshing these days. Hatred has become so ubiquitous and routine anymore, it's exhausting.
posted by homunculus at 4:45 PM on June 20, 2006
posted by homunculus at 4:45 PM on June 20, 2006
strange how that poor man refused to drink Zarqawi's rotting blood on national TV for the sake of the NEVAR FORGET crowd's sense of self-worth.
Of course! Exploiting his son's blood for political gain, as he's done since day one, is far better. I can see why you admire him.
posted by Krrrlson at 6:30 PM on June 20, 2006
Of course! Exploiting his son's blood for political gain, as he's done since day one, is far better. I can see why you admire him.
posted by Krrrlson at 6:30 PM on June 20, 2006
Of course! Exploiting his son's blood for political gain, as he's done since day one, is far better. I can see why you admire him.
Of course! Any grieving parent who's buried a child in Iraq mustn't criticize the chickenhawks who sent that child to die in their place, else they be accused of "exploting for political gain". That kind of overt projection assuages chickenhawk guilt about having someone else serve and die in their place.
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 7:18 PM on June 20, 2006
Of course! Any grieving parent who's buried a child in Iraq mustn't criticize the chickenhawks who sent that child to die in their place, else they be accused of "exploting for political gain". That kind of overt projection assuages chickenhawk guilt about having someone else serve and die in their place.
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 7:18 PM on June 20, 2006
fold_and_mutilate: Can't you do better than that? The son wasn't sent by anyone to go to Iraq. He went of his own accord--which, in my opinion, was pretty unwise, but . . . didn't deserve to die for that. He didn't even deserve to die for supporting a war we had no business starting. It's not as if he'd been in charge and he was helping to fix the place up, rather than ripping people off.
posted by raysmj at 7:56 PM on June 20, 2006
posted by raysmj at 7:56 PM on June 20, 2006
Berating by Ann Coulter in 5..4...3...
Wow, that Soledad O'Brien is everything Don Henley was talking about.
"Alternate reading to the scenario" of - what, revenge?
Dizzy f'ing talking head just doesn't want to listen.
"I'm by no means a conservative, but I can't see the sense in forgiving somebody for something they have expressed no regret over." - posted by Rusty Iron
Then you have much to learn. I'm a conservative. I'm all for it. Maybe it's the religion I studied as a kid. Maybe it's the Taoism. But I'm with Berg on this. For many reasons, but most particularly because he referenced John Donne's 17th Meditation, which is famous, at least in part (it's generated several sayings) so it means Berg has some eruidition but probably isn't putting on airs and O'Brien is somewhat stupid - since I caught the reference and I'm not a professional television personality and haven't met the man.
It frames his whole assertion - and illustrates how shallow a dufus she is.
Berg said he wasn't happy with the killing and said "any man's death diminishes me."
Here's an excerpt:
Meditation XVII
"...any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee.
Neither can we call this a begging of misery, or a borrowing of misery, as though we were not miserable enough of ourselves, but must fetch in more from the next house, in taking upon us the misery of our neighbours.
Truly it were an excusable covetousness if we did, for affliction is a treasure, and scarce any man hath enough of it..."
So we are to revel in the death of another man because it may pressure others to turn away from his path, Soledad?
Hell, we might as well start casting the stones now. But she probably wouldn't pick up on that reference either.
(I'd settle for the new testament I 'spose. But understanding Shirley Jackson seems way out of her league (I'd crap all over myself if she picked up on Deucalion and Pyrrha))
posted by Smedleyman at 12:25 AM on June 21, 2006 [1 favorite]
Wow, that Soledad O'Brien is everything Don Henley was talking about.
"Alternate reading to the scenario" of - what, revenge?
Dizzy f'ing talking head just doesn't want to listen.
"I'm by no means a conservative, but I can't see the sense in forgiving somebody for something they have expressed no regret over." - posted by Rusty Iron
Then you have much to learn. I'm a conservative. I'm all for it. Maybe it's the religion I studied as a kid. Maybe it's the Taoism. But I'm with Berg on this. For many reasons, but most particularly because he referenced John Donne's 17th Meditation, which is famous, at least in part (it's generated several sayings) so it means Berg has some eruidition but probably isn't putting on airs and O'Brien is somewhat stupid - since I caught the reference and I'm not a professional television personality and haven't met the man.
It frames his whole assertion - and illustrates how shallow a dufus she is.
Berg said he wasn't happy with the killing and said "any man's death diminishes me."
Here's an excerpt:
Meditation XVII
"...any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee.
Neither can we call this a begging of misery, or a borrowing of misery, as though we were not miserable enough of ourselves, but must fetch in more from the next house, in taking upon us the misery of our neighbours.
Truly it were an excusable covetousness if we did, for affliction is a treasure, and scarce any man hath enough of it..."
So we are to revel in the death of another man because it may pressure others to turn away from his path, Soledad?
Hell, we might as well start casting the stones now. But she probably wouldn't pick up on that reference either.
(I'd settle for the new testament I 'spose. But understanding Shirley Jackson seems way out of her league (I'd crap all over myself if she picked up on Deucalion and Pyrrha))
posted by Smedleyman at 12:25 AM on June 21, 2006 [1 favorite]
Any grieving parent who's buried a child in Iraq mustn't criticize the chickenhawks who sent that child to die in their place...
No, you're right. He should criticize the "chickenhawks" while absolving and almost praising the actual murderer, which he did practically since day one. Especially in light of the fact that no one sent Nick Berg anywhere, nor did he serve in the military.
posted by Krrrlson at 8:00 AM on June 21, 2006
No, you're right. He should criticize the "chickenhawks" while absolving and almost praising the actual murderer, which he did practically since day one. Especially in light of the fact that no one sent Nick Berg anywhere, nor did he serve in the military.
posted by Krrrlson at 8:00 AM on June 21, 2006
Yeah, pacifists are bad people, alright.
posted by sonofsamiam at 8:11 AM on June 21, 2006
posted by sonofsamiam at 8:11 AM on June 21, 2006
« Older A technological Hero | "Man down" Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by homunculus at 1:23 PM on June 20, 2006