Cindy Sheehan

[Marginal]

He did have to cut that one vacation short to sign "Terri's bill". Can't do everything from Crawford apparently.

 

[Tgace]

The truth about Cindy Sheehan.

 

[modarnis]

and Cindy Sheehan's own unbiased blog is available at:
http://michaelmoore.com/

 

[Makalakumu]

I'm going to side with my right leaning brothers right now. I really hate Michael Moore. Chasing this woman around with his video camara and bankrolling her grief driven actions is deplorable. Nobodies death should be turned into a political stunt...

There are better ways to oppose this war. There are better ways to show that real people are dying. Turning this into a soap opera is NOT one of them.

This is another case of political sensationalism. The right had their Terri Shaivo and now the left has Cindy Sheehan.

 

[heretic888]

While I agree with some of the points Moore makes in his books and movies...

I'm still left with the overall impression that the man is a partisan, self-righteous, pompous *******. In many ways he is to the Left what Ann Coulter is to the Right.

As I've said before, if you're going to go about crusading against injustice and moral outrage, it'd be best to have a few virtues (like, oh say, humility) yourself first.

Laterz.

 

[ginshun]

Interesting development according to thesmokinggun.com:

Sheehans Husband Seeks Divorce

Bush roadside protester named in California petition filed Friday

AUGUST 15--The next well-wisher approaching Cindy Sheehan at her tent encampment outside President George W. Bush's Texas vacation home may actually be a process server. That's because the California woman's husband--in a curious bit of timing--filed for divorce Friday afternoon (below you'll find a copy of Patrick Sheehan's complaint, lodged August 12 in Solano County District Court). With Sheehan, 48, entering a second week outside Bush's Crawford retreat, her husband's divorce petition cites "irreconcilable differences" for the demise of the couple's 28-year marriage (the Sheehans, the document states, have been separated since June 1). Along with a Vacaville home, Patrick Sheehan listed other "community assets" as "any and all benefits payable as a result of son's death," including a Prudential insurance policy and "benefits from the U.S. Government." From her roadside outpost, Sheehan, whose 24-year-old son Casey, an Army Specialist, was killed last year in Iraq, has become the face of the U.S. antiwar movement, telling reporters that she will not budge until Bush meets with her and explains "why our sons are dead." Noting that Bush has referred to the war as a "noble" pursuit, Sheehan told Reuters, "If it's such a noble cause, why aren't his daughters over there?" Through an aide, Patrick Sheehan's lawyer, Glen DeRonde, declined to comment about the court filing, so it is unclear whether the divorce complaint will be delivered to Cindy Sheehan in Texas or when she returns to her home east of San Francisco.

 

[Matt Stone]

Noting that Bush has referred to the war as a "noble" pursuit, Sheehan told Reuters, "If it's such a noble cause, why aren't his daughters over there?"

Um, because they didn't enlist, becoming volunteer soldiers, like SPC Sheehan did... twice.

If people can't see that she is pursuing her own agenda by this point, then they are hopelessly blind...

 

[ginshun]

Um, because they didn't enlist, becoming volunteer soldiers, like SPC Sheehan did... twice.

If people can't see that she is pursuing her own agenda by this point, then they are hopelessly blind...

Exactly, its not like Bush personally plucked her son out of his home and forced him into the war. He he signed up once, and then signed up again after the war had already started. I think he knew what he was getting into.

 

[Tgace]

Now that even some of my usual sparring partners are coming to somewhat of an agreement here, let me concede that there is nothing wrong at all with having a protest outside of the Pres. ranch. If folks are where they are supposed to be doing nothing illegal, they are well within their rights. My "problem" with Mrs. Sheehan is the obvious combination of her own inherent agenda and her manipulation by other political powers.

 

[sgtmac_46]

It's the short-sightedness of the whole thing that offends me. "Just bring the troops home"...oh, it's so simple...why didn't we think of that. Problem is, bringing the troops home will result in MORE American dead, not less.

These idiots can see past the nose on their face. If you pull the troops out now, the terrorists win...If the terrorists win this battle, then they will be convinced they will win the WAR. Thousands of fence riding Islamic extremists will be inspired by the victory, and will FLOCK to al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations to join the (now winning) campaign against the US and the west. Oh yeah, that's a plan.

Regardless of what you think of Bush or going in to Iraq to begin with, you'd have to be an idiot to believe that we can just pull out now. We're committed folks.


http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8966183/

Well, it seems that, for whatever reason, Mr. Sheehan has had enough. It is not clear what his motive for filing divorce is, but it's likely the strain of this entire ordeal.

Ironically, msnbc felt compelled to note that a row of crosses erected as protest by Ms. Sheehan and the other protesters were ran over by a pickup truck. The belief among the protesters, no doubt, is that it's a Republican conspiracy.

Just as likely, is the explaination that the crosses were struck by Senator Ted Kennedy, also on vacation in Texas, who was driving an intern back to her motel room after a night of drunken debauchery.

Mr. Kennedy is rumored to have remarked, "Thank god there wasn't a canal this time...now if I can only find my darn pants." At this point this is only speculation.


*********************************************************


It's the short-sightedness of the whole thing that offends me. "Just bring the troops home"...oh, it's so simple...why didn't we think of that. Problem is, bringing the troops home will result in MORE American dead, not less.

These idiots can see past the nose on their face. If you pull the troops out now, the terrorists win...If the terrorists win this battle, then they will be convinced they will win the WAR. Thousands of fence riding Islamic extremists will be inspired by the victory, and will FLOCK to al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations to join the (now winning) campaign against the US and the west. Nations like Iran, Syria, North Korea, etc, will feel confident in supporting and funding these terrorists, because they know we won't have the resolve to do anything about it. The house of cards will come tumbling down. Oh yeah, that's a plan.

Regardless of what you think of Bush or going in to Iraq to begin with, you'd have to be a complete moron to believe that we can just pull out now. We're committed folks. We CAN'T pull out, don't you understand. It would be a catastrophe of epic proportions. It won't be another Vietnam it'll be our Dien Bien Phu.

It's like standing in a closet holding a live handgrenade, and you can't find the pin. Dropping it is not an option. If you don't find the pin, you're dead. Overly simplistic ideals like "Bring the troops home now" aren't going to accomplish anything.

1800 troops dead in Iraq? Pull out now, and 1800 will seem cheap at twice the price, and it won't be just our soldiers and marines, it'll be young children and old folks, and a good cross section in between. We'll see things that make 9/11 look like a three car pile up on the freeway.

For better or worse we've stirred the hornets nest, now we have to deal. Running and hiding are NOT an option.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

Here you go:

http://www.wacotrib.com/hp/content/news/stories/2005/08/17/20050817waccrossmemorial.html

http://go.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=9391224&src=rss/topNews


A Viet Nam vet intentionally drives his truck across 800 crosses that they put up as a shrine honoring the war dead at "Camp Casey."

A shrine memorializing the war dead...and this guy desecrates it.

They were crosses...wouldn't that be blasphemy? The article mentions how the guy goes to church with the local sheriff, so I assume he's "God fearin'."

It strikes me that this goes WELL beyond the bounds of poor taste, even just ignoring the criminality of his actions. Can anybody here justify this on any grounds? Regardless of the nature of the reasons giving rise to the shrine, it was still a shrine to the war's casualties.

Edited addendum: I note the crosses were adorned with flags, which means that the flags were desecrated as well...and the second article mentions the perpetrator was 46, making him far too young to be a Viet Nam vet.


Regards,


Steve

 

[Tgace]

The guy was a putz....so.

 

[Phoenix44]

That's true. And he was arrested. Hey, every faction is entitled to its putz contingent.

 

[ginshun]

More news on the growing media circus surrronding Cindy Sheehan.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=19186

Apparently Neo-Nazis like her stance on Isreal.

Nothing says your doing the right thing like knowing that David Duke has your back. :|

Aperently every left wing kook in the contry is cashing in on Mrs. Sheehans noteriety. This thing is such a media created event in almost sickens me.

I am starting to feel a little sorry for this woman, and not because of the death of her son, because of the way she is letting herself become nothing more that a pawn in the game.

 

[heretic888]

Apparently Neo-Nazis like her stance on Isreal.

Nothing says your doing the right thing like knowing that David Duke has your back. :|

Not that I have a dog in this fight one way or the other (I'm actually somewhat indifferent about Ms. Sheehan's "campaign" here), but...

Simply assuming that one's position is incorrect solely because individuals you dislike also accept said position is a logical fallacy:

Logical Fallacy: Guilt By Association

Laterz.

 

[Phoenix44]

Really. As I said, every faction has its putz contingent.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Not that I have a dog in this fight one way or the other (I'm actually somewhat indifferent about Ms. Sheehan's "campaign" here), but...

Simply assuming that one's position is incorrect solely because individuals you dislike also accept said position is a logical fallacy:

Logical Fallacy: Guilt By Association

Laterz.

If you really have no dog in this race, you might want to explain that to hardhead and his "god fearin christian" comment. David Duke agreeing with Sheehan is no more or less of a comment about her position than the fact that some lone nut ran over some crosses is a comment about the opposite position. "Guilty by Association". I'm willing to simply believe you happened to miss hardhead's comment, and that's why you didn't include it with this one.

 

[heretic888]

If you really have no dog in this race, you might want to explain that to hardhead and his "god fearin christian" comment. David Duke agreeing with Sheehan is no more or less of a comment about her position than the fact that some lone nut ran over some crosses is a comment about the opposite position. "Guilty by Association". I'm willing to simply believe you happened to miss hardhead's comment, and that's why you didn't include it with this one.

So, lemme get this straight...

Me "not having a dog in this fight" = Me "having a personal responsibility to correct Steve's comments about wacky Christians".

Uh-huh. Sure.

 

[sgtmac_46]

So, lemme get this straight...

Me "not having a dog in this fight" = Me "having a personal responsibility to correct Steve's comments about wacky Christians".

Uh-huh. Sure.

Not at all, I said I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. I was just pointing out that there were two posts, not one your comment applied to. I never claimed that slight was intentional on your part. In fact, I thought so much of your post that I simply wanted to extend it's influence to other posts it applied to. Sorry if you didn't catch that part.

 

[Tgace]

But all the same it is interesting WHO gets the attention.