Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« ...and that's why the MGM studio cafeteria always had poutine on the menu... | Main | Still not allowed »

Saturday, May 27, 2006

Preparez vos mouchoirs

The front page of today's Toronto Star shows Dr. Tim Goddard, father of Nichola Goddard, next to his daughter's flag-draped coffin, his right fist clenched and his face twisted in grief. The subhead reads: "In a tearful farewell to his daughter, Tim Goddard criticizes Ottawa for keeping the return of fallen soldiers private." The Toronto Sun ran with a different picture of Tim Goddard's face twisted in grief, under the banner headline TEARS FOR A SOLDIER. Both, I'm sure, are factually correct. That doesn't make them appropriate.

I happened to hear Tim Goddard interviewed on some Toronto radio show or other last week. His composure was inspirational, as it was during the part of his eulogy that ran on The National last night. I didn't hear so much as a quiver in his voice as he explained how proud he is of the difference his daughter made in her short life.

We live in a time when refusing to behave as expected can make you a murder suspect. The problem is that to a significant extent the media creates those expectations. If you don't believe me just check out the stomach-turning Nancy Grace on CNN. The Nichola Goddard story is one of dignified, confident resolve, both on her part and on her family's. It's a dangerous game criticizing the way people you don't know handle grief, but I think we can all agree that the Goddard family handled theirs with unimpeachable courage. There's your headline. Leave the tears out of it for once.

(Cross-posted to Tart Cider.)

Posted by Chris Selley on May 27, 2006 | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Preparez vos mouchoirs:


Dr. Goddard meet Cindy Sheehan, Cindy Sheehan meet Dr. Goddard.

Posted by: John Brown | 2006-05-27 7:54:17 PM

John: Are you really trying to compare a certifiable nut like Cindy Sheehan to an intelligent man like Dr. Goddard? He took about 20 seconds out of a 30 minute eulogy to criticize one small decision the PM made, and at no time has questioned the necessity of the mission, in fact at one point during the eulogy he stated that it is an important one. The media simply decided to dwell on that one portion because they are just stupid children still upset that PMSH doesn't let them set the narrative. Cindy Sheehan on the other hand has allowed the anger she has over her son's death to completely undermine her judgement, and at times it would seem her sanity.

BTW it is nice to see someone else hates Nancy Grace too. That b**ch is the most horrible human being on the planet.

Posted by: WinnipegLibertarian | 2006-05-27 9:03:51 PM

If you've ever listened to Nancy Grace on TV.....boy, we should be encouraging the islamofascists to take more white females like NG to the woodshed; what an awful, dishonest, creepy human being she is (hell, she should be "teaching" english at one of our "esteemed" Canadian universities).
anyway, what a slimy b****.

Posted by: blainek | 2006-05-28 12:19:20 AM


Dr. Goddard is of course entitled to his opinions and is also free to make those opinions public whenever and where ever he chooses. One would have hoped that he might not have chosen his child's casket to use as his soapbox (a la Cindy Sheehan). Dr. Goddard is not entitled to put words into the mouth's of those who are no longer with us nor is he entitled to speak for other members of the military or their families. All Canadians will deal with lose of a loved one at some point in their lives - I realize losing a daughter in combat justifies some form of media attention - but for anyone to suggest his lose is somehow "greater" than mine or yours is absurd. (Un)fortunately no one chooses to stick a camera in my face when a family member dies tragically. I would hope that if that ever did happen, I would be respectful enough to have only good things to say about my loved one, and save the political commentary for another time.
I think Dr. Goddard could have taken a moral high road and saved his comments for later (perhaps an exclusive interview), not while he was mourning the lose of his daughter - of course the time and place of his rant are his to choose. He made a personal choice to use his daughter's service to air his poilitcal viewpoints and for that I think he deserves criticism.
In the Cindy Sheehan case, certain anti-Bush activists in the US saw her as the ideal figurehead for their cause - who would dare to cirticise a mourning mother? Turns out Sheehan is a legitimate nut case. In Dr. Goddard's case, again, who would dare criticise the actions of a mourning father? Well I'm sorry - he chose the setting for his poilitical activism, knowing full well the MSM would be present to air his viewpoints in all their glory. And for this he opened himself up for cirticism.

Posted by: John Brown | 2006-05-28 10:18:35 AM

I'm am completely repulsed by the conservative sentiment that grieving parents are not allowed to have political opinions, especially after politics leads to the death of their children!

Don't you have anything better to do than attack a distraught parent and trivialize his sorrow?

Posted by: MakesMeSick | 2006-05-28 11:12:37 AM

Best get used to it; these clowns have no shame. They engage in this sort of crap on a fairly regular basis.

Posted by: truewest | 2006-05-28 2:00:36 PM

Leftist politics made Captain Goddard an infantry combat platoon leader, Muslim politics killed her.

MakesMeSick, you aren't repulsed enough in my opinion.

Posted by: Speller | 2006-05-28 3:54:27 PM

Dr. Goddard used his free speech to make a political opinion, and we're using ours as well.

Suck it up. This is a political forum.

Posted by: Speller | 2006-05-28 3:56:50 PM

Yeah, you're entitled to your opinions. And your opinions expose you as the shameless, opportunistic swine that you are, members of the same unprincipled tribe that, in the U.S. Republican Party, attacks war heros like McCain, Cleland and Kerry for short-term political gain. Suck it up, indeed. Spit it out is more like it. It leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

Posted by: truewest | 2006-05-28 7:40:21 PM

Was McCain a war hero because he was shot down by the commies or because he has sold out to the commies?

Is he your hero trueweasle? He isn't mine.

The mouth? Is that your new name, trueweasle?

Posted by: Speller | 2006-05-29 5:22:41 PM

Isn't it true Dr. Goddard met with PM Harper a week or so ago? And this grievence was not discussed? Not until the eulogy? Dr. Goddard also shared his leftist views on how we should be "educating the enemy" as opposed to fighting them. He said his daughter often debated this and other topics. Perhaps he felt it his duty to take a shot at a "right-wing" Prime Minister.

Posted by: Bruce | 2006-05-29 7:05:32 PM

It's not about your heroes or mine. It's about certain levels of human decency, standards which you clowns routinely disregard as you spew the bile that you call opinion.

As Joseph Welch said to that drunk Joe McCarthy (who is, no doubt, one of your heroes, given your shared disregard for niceties like evidence): You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?

BTW if "mouth" is my new nickname, another orifice would certainly serve as yours. And, no, it isn't your ear.

Posted by: truewest | 2006-05-29 11:59:08 PM

Yes, US Senator Joseph McCarthy, is a hero.
McCarthy wasn't drunk when Welch asked, "have you no decency" in response to Senator McCarthy identifying a communist in Welch's law firm.
Welch had been gay baiting McCarthy's aide Roy Cohen for 3 hours and mockingly demanding to know "where the communists were".
Senator McCarthy told him where one was.

Posted by: Speller | 2006-05-30 11:21:55 AM

Yes lefties,

You have far more decorum than us there mouth breathing heathen...

The Daily Kos says so...


The left has nothing to teach us about decorum. They're the assholes praying that more soldiers and killed and the islamofascists win.

You hypocritical jerkoffs can F.O.A.D.

Posted by: Warwick | 2006-05-30 11:29:31 AM

Doc Goddard is an opportunistic a**hole, if he did in fact speak with PM Harper and did not raise concerns at the time.

Without getting into a long, drawn-out philosophial debate about the difference of committing a sin and committing a crime, Doc Goddard committed a sin of disrespecting the price his daughter paid for the concept of free speech.

Now, if parents are consulted before bodies are flown into Canada for a public spectacle and those particular parents are comfortable with their children's deaths being used to make a political statement, fine.

If parents request cameras away from their children's caskets, then those rights should be respected.

One solution might to to have two flights coming in to respect the viewpoints of both parents.

Far as I understand, there is no option at the other end ... when the bodies are being loaded on a plane in Europe, it's fair game for everybody.

Now, if the government is BSing about consulting with parents, that should be easy enough to determine ... just ask the parents if they were asked.

And, Warwick, I agree with your last sentence about the hypocritical jerkoffs. They're not too tough to identify.

Posted by: Set you free | 2006-05-30 12:29:47 PM


I see you share the late Senator's devotion to accuracy and respect for the truth.

So you won't mind if I point out that a) Fred Fisher, the lawyer named by McCarthy, wasn't a communist b)Welch didn't spend three hours gay-baiting Cohn, although he did make a quip about "fairies" c) that's C-O-H-N d)Cohn, despite being gay, made it his life's work to make things miserable for gays, right up the day he died of AIDS. That would make him a hypocrite, just like someone who suddenly objects to gay-baiting only when it serves your, sorry, his purposes.

No wonder McCarthy's your hero. You're both strangers to the truth. You're both full of bluff, bluster and bullsh*t, waving around your laundry list and calling it proof. In short, you're both hateful little creeps.

And SYF and Warwick, you guys aren't much better. This notion that anyone who doesn't share your ill-considered political philosophy is a cheerleader for islamofascists is beneath contempt, much less argument, and is typical of the demagoguery you try to pass off as argument. Neither of you is fit to breathe the same air as either Goddard. And this crass familiarity -- Doc Goddard -- is a thin disguise for your outright contempt for anyone who actually takes time to learn about the world, beyond the innate prejudices that you clowns try to pass off as common sense.

Posted by: truewest | 2006-05-30 7:25:58 PM

[AUTHENTICITY CERTIFIED: Text version below transcribed directly from audio (2)]

McCarthy: (Mr. Chairman) ...in view of Mr. Welch's request that the information be given once we know of anyone who might be performing any work for the Communist Party, I think we should tell him that he has in his law firm a young man named Fisher whom he recommended, incidentally, to do the work on this Committee, who has been, for a number of years, a member of an organization which is named, oh, years and years ago, as the legal bulwark of the Communist Party, an organization which always springs to the defense of anyone who dares to expose Communists.

Knowing that, Mr. Welch, I just felt that I had a duty to respond to your urgent request that "before sundown," when we know of anyone serving the Communist cause we let the agency know. Now, we're now letting you know that your man did belong to this organization for either three or four years, belonged to it long after he was out of law school. And I have hesitated bringing that up, but I have been rather bored with your phony requests to Mr. Cohn here, that he, personally, get every Communist out of Government before sundown. Whether you knew that he was a member of that Communist organization or not, I don't know. I assume you did not, Mr. Welch, because I get the impression that while you are quite an actor, you play for a laugh, I don't think you have any conception of the danger of the Communist Party. I don't think you, yourself, would ever knowingly aid the Communist cause. I think you're unknowingly aiding it when you try to burlesque this hearing in which we're attempting to bring out the facts.

Welch: Mr. Chairman....

Mundt: The Chair may say that he has no recognition or no memory of Mr. Welch recommending either Mr. Fisher or anybody else as counsel for this Committee.

McCarthy: I refer to the record, Mr. Chairman...to the news story on that.

Welch: Mr. Chairman. Under these circumstances, I must myself have something approaching a personal privilege.

Mundt: You may have, sir --

Welch: Senator McCarthy, I did not know, Senator -- Senator, sometimes you say may I have your attention --

McCarthy: I'm listening....

Welch: May I have your attention?

McCarthy: I can listen with one ear and talk with --.

Welch: No, this time, sir, I want you to listen with both. Senator McCarthy, I think until this moment --

McCarthy: -- Good. Just a minute. Jim, Jim, will you get the news story to the effect that this man belongs to the -- to this Communist front organization....

Welch: I will tell you that he belonged to it.

McCarthy: Jim, will you get the citation, one of the citations showing that this was the legal arm of the Communist Party, and the length of time that he belonged, and the fact that he was recommended by Mr. Welch. I think that should be in the record....

Welch: Senator, you won't need anything in the record when I finish telling you this. Until this moment, Senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty, or your recklessness. Fred Fisher is a young man who went to the Harvard Law School and came into my firm and is starting what looks to be a brilliant career with us. When I decided to work for this Committee, I asked Jim St. Clair, who sits on my right, to be my first assistant. I said to Jim, "Pick somebody in the firm to work under you that you would like." He chose Fred Fisher, and they came down on an afternoon plane. That night, when we had taken a little stab at trying to see what the case is about, Fred Fisher and Jim St. Clair and I went to dinner together. I then said to these two young men, "Boys, I don't know anything about you, except I've always liked you, but if there's anything funny in the life of either one of you that would hurt anybody in this case, you speak up quick."

And Fred Fisher said, "Mr. Welch, when I was in the law school, and for a period of months after, I belonged to the Lawyers' Guild," as you have suggested, Senator. He went on to say, "I am Secretary of the Young Republican's League in Newton with the son of [the] Massachusetts governor, and I have the respect and admiration of my community, and I'm sure I have the respect and admiration of the twenty-five lawyers or so in Hale & Dorr." And I said, "Fred, I just don't think I'm going to ask you to work on the case. If I do, one of these days that will come out, and go over national television, and it will just hurt like the dickens." And so, Senator, I asked him to go back to Boston. Little did I dream you could be so reckless and so cruel as to do an injury to that lad. It is, I regret to say, equally true that I fear he shall always bear a scar needlessly inflicted by you. If it were in my power to forgive you for your reckless cruelty, I would do so. I like to think I'm a gentle man, but your forgiveness will have to come from someone other than me.

McCarthy: Mr. Chairman, may I say that Mr. Welch talks about this being cruel and reckless. He was just baiting. He has been baiting Mr. Cohn here for hours, requesting that Mr. Cohn before sundown get out of any department of the government anyone who is serving the Communist cause. Now, I just give this man's record and I want to say, Mr. Welch, that it had been labeled long before he became a member, as early as 1944 --

Welch: Senator, may we not drop this? We know he belonged to the Lawyers' Guild.

McCarthy: Let me finish....

Welch: And Mr. Cohn nods his head at me. I did you, I think, no personal injury, Mr. Cohn?

Cohn: No, sir.

Welch: I meant to do you no personal injury.

Cohn: No, sir.

Welch: And if I did, I beg your pardon. Let us not assassinate this lad further, Senator.

McCarthy: Let's, let's --

Welch: You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?

McCarthy: I know this hurts you, Mr. Welch.

Welch: I'll say it hurts!

McCarthy: Mr. Chairman, as point of personal privilege, I'd like to finish this.

Welch: Senator, I think it hurts you, too, sir.

McCarthy: I'd like to finish this. I know Mr. Cohn would rather not have me go into this. I intend to, however, and Mr. Welch talks about any "sense of decency." I have heard you and everyone else talk so much about laying the truth upon the table. But when I heard the completely phony Mr. Welch, I've been listening now for a long time, he's saying, now "before sundown" you must get these people "out of government." So I just want you to have it very clear, very clear that you were not so serious about that when you tried to recommend this man for this Committee.

Welch: Mr. McCarthy, I will not discuss this further with you. You have sat within six feet of me and could ask -- could have asked me about Fred Fisher. You have seen fit to bring it out, and if there is a God in heaven, it will do neither you nor your cause any good. I will not discuss it further. I will not ask, Mr. Cohn, any more witnesses. You, Mr. Chairman, may, if you will, call the next witness.


See Also: Recently released "secret transcripts" at: http://www.gpo.gov/congress/senate/senate12cp107.html

Welch himself had outed Fisher six weeks earlier.

Welch "had brought it up publicly in the New York Times," Evans tells AIM. "In the New York Times there was a big picture of Fred Fisher [with Welch saying] he had relieved him of the [Army/McCarthy] investigations because he [admitted] he had been a member of the National Lawyers Guild when Welch confronted him." Thus, says Evans, "Welch had done exactly what he was deploring McCarthy for doing."

After the hearing adjourned, Welch quickly walked out to the hall and around the corner. Whereupon—believing the audience and TV cameras were out of sight—the Army counsel turned to an associate and asked, "Well, how did it go?"

During the Cold War, the National Lawyers Guild was an active affiliate of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers. In 1978, the CIA described the NLG as "one of the most useful Communist front organizations at the service of the Soviet Communist Party, [an organization that] has so consistently demonstrated its support of Moscow's foreign policy objectives, and is so tied in with other front organizations and the Communist press, that it is difficult for it to pretend that its judgments are fair or relevant to basic legal tenets."

The political makeup of National Lawyers Guild members has been described as including cadres from Leninist, Trotskyist, Stalinist, and Maoist groups, as well as Marxists, anarchists, libertarians, progressive independents, and reluctant Democrats. The professional makeup of the National Lawyers Guild members inlcudes lawyers, legal workers, labor organizers, tribal sovereignty activists, civil liberties advocates, civil rights advocates, environmentalists, as well as many others.

Posted by: Speller | 2006-05-30 11:44:43 PM


What guild do you suppose trueweasel belongs to?

I suppose he's entitled to mouth-breathe the same air as Doc Goddard, rant and call names.

Here is a list of terms liberals apply to virtually every idea or action with which they differ:


And here is the list of one-word descriptions of what liberals are for:

The poor
The disenfranchised
The environment


Even though this is admittedly a cut-and-paste list, it sure helps us understand where trueweasel is coming from.

I guess he figures because these preceding techniques a university perfesser taught him about activism and questioning the status quo, that being an attack dog all his life somehow makes him smart.

Wrong: It just makes him a predictable slave for the religion of secular humanism.

Tell us, o slimy one, have we missing out on any of your tactics?

Bitchiness has never equalled intelligence.

And, as you've quite often proven on this forum, you are some bitch.

Posted by: Set you free | 2006-05-31 12:21:34 AM

Ah, the joys of guilt by association. You really are a worthy successor to Joe McCarthy. The fact that Fisher belonged to the National Lawyer's Guild doesn't make him a communist, nor does Welch's tactical decision to remove a junior lawyer from his team, in anticipation of McCarthy's by-then well-established practice of guilt by association, amount to an "outing".

But gee, thanks for all the cut-and-pasting you've done.

Just to be clear, I'm not calling you intolerant, or racist or Islamophobic or any of those other things you offer up in your cut-and-paste. (What's next, oh deep thinker - posting bumper stickers?) I'm calling you an shithead, a waste of skin, a creep. I'd use the same terms to describe anyone who attacks the grieving father or mother of dead soldier because they didn't toe the party line or because they dared to say something critical of the political leadership or the war effort.

Oh, and that whole "university perfesser" thing? It's you all over: "I don't got no time for book learnin' and all that pointy-headed stuff. But mah daddy sure whupped some common sense into me back behind the tool shed and, if I do say so mahself, I am a fine student of tha human character. If I do say so mahself."

Posted by: truewest | 2006-05-31 7:31:11 AM

Guilt not stemming from association, like presumed innocence, is a legal fiction.

Specifically, one who's association is CASUAL cannot be seen as guilty.

Fred Fisher's relationship to the NLG, a COMMUNIST FRONT ORGANIZATION, was over a period of several YEARS and was not in the least casual.

Dr. Goddard used his daughter's corpse as a soapbox and people who point it out are the crass ones?

You truly are a weasle, trueweasle.

And yes, the above dialogue between Senator McCarthy and Welch was copied and pasted.
It shows that Welch outed Fisher several weeks prior to McCarthy, but Welch is accusing McCarthy of something Welch himself ALREADY DID in the NEW YORK TIMES.

Posted by: Speller | 2006-05-31 8:37:53 AM

Seems to me that when you bury a child, you have a certain license to speak your mind and that decent people will cut a fair bit of slack.
You, however, reserve the right to parse and poke and snipe if a grieving parent disagrees with your take on the war, the world or the prime minister.
You should be ashamed. But shame seems beyond you.

Fisher never was a communist. And indeed, as your own cut-and-pasting makes clear, while the NLG included communist lawyers, its membership was and is more broadly based. (Its status as communist-front organization came courtesy of HUAC, the same body that McCarthy used as a platform for his demagoguery, and should be accordingly taken with a large grain of salt.) Fisher incidentally, went on to become partner in a 1000-lawyer law firm and to serve as head of the Massachusetts Bar Association. I suppose, by your logic, these were likewise communist front organizations.

Now back to the fields. I hear the heifer lowing.

Posted by: truewest | 2006-05-31 9:28:15 AM


Everyone has licence to speak their mind, not just Dr. Goddard. He happens to have created the topic.

Fisher was a communist, and yes the Massachuesset's Bar Association is full of communists. Having a sprinkling of non-communists is what makes a FRONT effective.

Soviet KGB agent Alger Hiss was a Harvard man. He was also a top advisor to Presidents FDR and HST and on the steering committee for the United Nations.

Posted by: Speller | 2006-05-31 9:39:21 AM


I didn't say that the left is a cheerleader for the islamofascists. The left did.


Michael Moore has stated that the terrorists in Iraq are patriotic "minute men"

The left regularly calls the terrorists "freedom fighters" and calls on GI's to "frag" their officers.

The left has tried everything they can to see the US lose (and what is the flip-side of wanting one side to lose if not to see the other side win?)

Go to Kos or Rabble or any of the other left-wing sites and this sort of crap is the norm.

If you want to see what the left is, go here and look at the pics:


To deny this is to have your head up your a$$ which is what makes you a leftie to begin with...

The left wants to destroy the west. This is fact.

Posted by: Warwick | 2006-05-31 10:00:06 AM

Actually, look through the rest of Zombie's site.


If you can still say that the left isn't cheerleaders for islamofascists you're a retard.

Posted by: Warwick | 2006-05-31 10:06:50 AM

I'll say this slowly, so you can understand: There's a vast difference between saying that there are those on the left who are cheerleaders for islamofacism (although it might be more accurate to say that they oppose the current war in Iraq) and to say that the left as a whole are cheerleaders. To conflate these two is the same as saying that Donald Rumsfeld and Timothy McVeigh are marching side by side: i.e. idiotic.

BTW, the use of the word terrorist as a blanket term to describe those blowing things up in Iraq is unforgivably sloppy. While there are, no doubt, factions targetting civilians who might properly be called "terrorists", the term is not properly applied to those who attack military forces. Funny thing -- you put foreign troops into a country, someone inevitably gets pissed off and tries to persuade them to leave. If that's terrorism, then there are a lot of people we've hailed as heroes -- the French resistance for example -- who merit the tag.


Posted by: truewest | 2006-05-31 10:37:22 AM


What's more important ... the opinion of the immediate family or the opinion of the mob?

Where you're coming from is so obvious, all we can do is laugh.

Most of us here are free thinkers ... those who know the truth is out there and to be found one treasure at a time.

Evidently, from both your approach and your tone, it's obvious you are a follower of somebody else's template.

In this intenet world, information is readily available from a bewildering number of sources.

Granted, the internet is just a tool like a hammer by which humanity's ability to reason can be expressed.

By your tone, I can tell you have not developed enough confidence or initiative to question those into whose philosophial bent you have willingly become a slave.

The reason I pointed out the previous definition of a liberal is because in my experience I have found most who call themselves liberal actually do live in a cut-and-past world.

This willingness to enslave themselves to a guru of the world demands clicking off the brain and gaining a false sense of power through rhetorical speech. It's an interesting cloak for avoiding your real inner issues, yet for free thinkers the cloak is easily shredded because it is the epitome of superficiality.

Think deep or go home. Mamma took care of you then. You'd like the Nanny State to look after you now.

Although I feel sorry for how easily you have sold yourself into this slavery, at some point you have to take the blinkers and chains off and learn how to fly by your own intellect.

I know you have it in you.

Posted by: Set you free | 2006-05-31 11:49:24 AM

I don't think trueweasle has what it takes. No character.

Warwick, has it right. Trueweasle is a retard.

Posted by: Speller | 2006-05-31 12:00:21 PM

I love it when you call me names. It exposes your ignorance and the vacuity of your argument.
As for SFY's babble, he's so busy clapping himself on the back for a being a "free-thinker", he forgets to offer any substance, rational argument or anything other than invective. Which, I suppose, is better than what he does come with up when he does turn his mind to matter of substance (e.g. his assertion that welfare moms owe him a piece of ass or his bizarre theories of Palestinian Christians being the true victims of the middle east.)
there's a word for people like SFY. And that word is "crank".

Posted by: truewest | 2006-05-31 1:40:10 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.