As the occupation of Iraq enters, what seems to be, its final stages before erupting into an all-out civil war that threatens to engulf the entire region in one way or another, the situation in this country seems to remain steady as she goes. An election won, a new year begun, and it seems like the more things change the more they stay the same. The President seems reluctant to accept any advice or criticism from outside of his loyal circle, and would rather make boisterous statements about being the "decider" on all issues regarding the war regardless of which party is in power. The Vice President, in all of his ominous glory, would rather spar with Wolf Blitzer over the appropriateness of questions regarding his pregnant, lesbian daughter and proclaiming that nothing will stop the "surge" from advancing. Is it just me, or didn't we spend the entire last year, and most of the previous three, hearing exactly the same thing? If someone can tell me what the point of democracy is, then I'd love to hear it.

From the misguided stunts of the anti-war movement to the increasingly erratic behavior of the citizens of this town, Pittsburgh has it all wrong on a number of fronts. Perhaps it's because of the New Year’s infancy and my own expectations for some newfound civility and common sense in this town, or maybe it's just a case of the winter blues. Whatever the reason, I'm about to unleash a torrent of criticism on Pittsburgh in this post, so turn away if that's what you're not here for.

Anti-War Follies
First, anti-war protesters here in Pittsburgh routinely target the recruiting office right here in the heart of Oakland for their demonstrations. This is not without precedent, and I would agree that recruiter tactics are, without question, somewhat underhanded in nature. However, the latest stunt by the demonstrators left a bad taste in my mouth and more than a little perturbed at, what can be best described as, a desperate attempt to seem relevant and part of the larger anti-war movement. Earlier this month, the so-called Pittsburgh Organizing Group "successfully disrupted the military recruitment machine in Pittsburgh yet again." What made this different from the usual protests is explained as follows:

One difference about this picket, as compared to past ones, was the call for people to bring whipped cream pies (because recruiters should be afraid to show their faces). A number of individuals, young and old, responded to the call and showed up, pie in hand.

As far as I can tell, attacking recruiters in this crude manner has little or nothing to do with their practices and will lead to little or nothing more than a brief mention on the nightly news and the newspapers. Now, I'm not someone who supports the war in Iraq, or occupation as it should be referred to, but I don't think that this is how one should go about the process of voicing that opposition. Attacking soldiers, regardless of their position, is a cowardly act plain and simple, and it's not as if the recruiters are civilians, which wouldn't necessarily make this acceptable.

What else bothers me about this type of action is that I feel that it's just another attempt by Pittsburghers to feel as if they're part of a larger movement, which I just don't think they are. People here want it both ways, and that's just not possible. What I find puzzling about this town is that there seems to be this resistance to anything that's cosmopolitan in nature and outright offense taken when someone from outside of the area remains unimpressed with the scene here. On the other hand, the anti-war movement here would lead you to believe that they're part and parcel of a larger, more impressive machine. This is misleading, to say the least. When one looks at those in attendance, you don't see or hear from any Cindy Sheehan types. No, quite the opposite is apparent. To quote, reluctantly Donald Rumsfeld, these are simply the "dead enders" of the movement. These include the tattooed and pierced set of the "cooler than thou" crowd who I find incredibly puzzling in their desire to portray themselves as an all inclusive group, but are more than likely to act as the antithesis of the highbrow cliques they seek to counteract.

I heartedly endorse protesting the war. In fact, I think it's necessary, but I feel that it's somewhat diluted when you're main proponents are infected with poorly thought out ideas of what's right and how best to draw attention to the cause. Also, the amount of hypocrisy involved within the ranks of those who comprise the group is a little more than offsetting as well.