Dead Soldier; Happy Mom

[Don Roley]

How has her 'intent' been proven as fact?

Unless, of course, you argue the pattern of behavior.... but, her behavior has been within the bounds of the Constitution. ...

No, I think you are trying to distort the issue. The matter of her past behavior is being pointed to as reason to not trust her version of events unless their is some sort of proof. There seems to be no one else that can say they saw the whole screaming, running, etc that she says went on in a room of a maybe a few hundred people.

 

[michaeledward]

No, I think you are trying to distort the issue. The matter of her past behavior is being pointed to as reason to not trust her version of events unless their is some sort of proof. There seems to be no one else that can say they saw the whole screaming, running, etc that she says went on in a room of a maybe a few hundred people.

And the person who said she 'Did not respond' was not in the building at the time either.

 

[michaeledward]

That didn't even make sense, michael. Could you please restate that.

Let me sumerise for you. Cindy Sheehan is a publicity hound. She lives for controversy. It's the only way she gets her message out. When she protests within the bounds of the law, she can say whatever she wants. She camped out in Texas, and got all the publicity she wanted legally. However, eventually people started getting bored with her. So then she had to get kookier and kookier to get the cameras pointed her way.

She intended to provoke an incident at the State of the Union Address, for the purposes of getting arrested, because she knew getting arrested would get her name back on the front page. I have no doubt she orchestrated the incident, and acted in such a way as to provoke arrest. That's her 'pattern of behavior' now, as you call it, to get arrested for publicity. Her handlers have decided that it is necessary to get publicity.

LMFAO. It's obvious what Cindy Sheehan is, and that's a publicity animal. She wants to get arrested. She was arrested because she wanted to get arrested. She set out to provoke an arrest. That's she's now playing the 'victim' is nothing new. That's part of her modus operandi. Provoke arrest, and then play the martyr. It's a continuing cycle of her martyr complex.

Moreover, michael, you're well aware of all of this. You're a smart guy. You're just a happy, willing participant in spreading the myth, but you very well know the truth, even if you don't admit it.

Her intent was to get arrested, so that she could continue her 15-minutes of fame, by getting us to talk about her getting arrested.

You should be used to running in circles by now.

There are an awful lot of opinion statements being presented as fact.

• "Cindy Sheehan is a publicity hound"
• "She lives for controversy."
• "She intended to provoke an incident"
• "I have no doubt she orchestrated the incident"

These statements are your beliefs, and you are not alone. A recent, unscientific, web poll indicated that 17% of respondents felt the same way.

Seems to me that these beliefs of yours are prejudicing your opinions and comments. Because it's Cindy Sheehan . . . .

Except we have many posts on this board about the President quarrantining dissent.

So, while Ms. Sheehan has a pattern of behavior ... about which you claim no one's rights were violated.

The President also has a pattern of behavior ... and there is a picture of a little old lady being carried away in her lawn chair somewhere on this board ... which I believe violates rights.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

I dont think the general public even cares about Cindy now. She started out as a sympathetic figure but turned herself into a nutjob.

 

[celtic_crippler]

Simply put, she makes a mockery of the sacrifice her son made. Being a vet, I can tell you that if my mother ever thought of doing anything remotely similar I would be ashamed and embarrassed.

1) Our military is made up completely of volunteers. No one is FORCED to join therefore no one is FORCED to go to war. If you joined up for college money...I'd like to say I'm sorry...but I'm not. It's the Army... what did you think the Army was for??

2) Her son obviously held values (God, country, Mom's apple pie, freedom, and sacrifice to name a few) not held by his mother (ie: he joined the military....of his own free will *see #1) She is, quite simply put, crapping on his values and his grave as wll as the sacrifice he made. This fact has been stated by other family members (that don't get near the press Cindy does.)

Before you go off on me I recently lost a friend and former student in Iraq. He too, joined up of his own free will because of his beliefs. I still have friends serving today. They too, joined of their own free will and would consider it an extreme sign of disrespect for anyone to belittle or degrade their sacrifices.

Cindy Sheehan was being used as a tool by anti-Bush supporters until they realized that her blatant stupidity and idiotic comments made them look even worse.

I think it has more to do with their extreme hatred of Bush than it does the war in Iraq. They're so blinded by their hatred that they don't care who suffers from their efforts to get rid of Bush at all costs.

Sad really. They would have voted Joeseph Stalin in to power if it would have meant getting rid of Bush.

 

[shesulsa]

Mod. Note.
Please, keep the conversation polite and refrain from personal attacks.

-G Ketchmark / shesulsa
-Sr. Moderator-

 

[sgtmac_46]

There are an awful lot of opinion statements being presented as fact.

• "Cindy Sheehan is a publicity hound"
• "She lives for controversy."
• "She intended to provoke an incident"
• "I have no doubt she orchestrated the incident"

These statements are your beliefs, and you are not alone. A recent, unscientific, web poll indicated that 17% of respondents felt the same way.

Seems to me that these beliefs of yours are prejudicing your opinions and comments. Because it's Cindy Sheehan . . . .

Except we have many posts on this board about the President quarrantining dissent.

So, while Ms. Sheehan has a pattern of behavior ... about which you claim no one's rights were violated.

The President also has a pattern of behavior ... and there is a picture of a little old lady being carried away in her lawn chair somewhere on this board ... which I believe violates rights.

hehe. You don't even believe Cindy's not a publicity hound, you're just attempting to muddy the waters. You know exactly what Cindy is, you just happen to agree with her basic premise, and that's fine. However, lets not pretend Cindy is anything other than what she is....a manufactured issue. Her wealthy handlers and backers gave her a makeover, because they needed a 'goldstar mom' to push their agenda. It's all so pathetically artificial.

Now, many of her former handlers, I think, wish she'd go away. But Cindy's grown to like the limelight. In fact, the most offensive thing anyone could say, as far as Cindy Sheehan is concerned, is.........'Cindy who?'

So i'm going to let the issue drop, because Cindy's not worth the continued waste of cyberspace. I'd suggest anyone else who feels the same, should let it drop as well. Keeping 'whats-her-name' in the conversation is only playing their game. Without controversy, she's not even a blip on the radar.

 

[michaeledward]

Well, I guess it's nice that the United States Capitol Police played right into her hands then ... boy, they must be really stupid, if this ding-bat media hound was able to play them like a toy drum.

Wonder how they manage to keep anyone safe.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Well, I guess it's nice that the United States Capitol Police played right into her hands then ... boy, they must be really stupid, if this ding-bat media hound was able to play them like a toy drum.

Wonder how they manage to keep anyone safe.

You're right, it was pretty stupid on their part. Anyone with an ounce of brains knows that Cindy wants to get arrested, and when the powers that be saw that she managed to get her way, they probably developed a migraine. I bet she wasn't even in the station house, when the phone call came saying 'Let the ding-bat go'.

The officer that arrested her was doing nobody any favors....except, maybe, as you called her 'the ding-bat media hound' and her handlers.

 

[michaeledward]

Ms. Sheehan was held in custody for four hours before being released. If she was not at the Station House, where would she have been?

And I resent the implication that I have less than an ounce of brains.

 

[qizmoduis]

I dont think the general public even cares about Cindy now. She started out as a sympathetic figure but turned herself into a nutjob.

No she hasn't. The right-wing political smear machine has done this. You can see it happening in this very thread. Any conscientious American citizen who dares to stir up a little dissent immediately becomes the target of focused attention of the same group of character-assassins behind the infamous and false "Swift Boat" tactics we saw during the last election. Mrs. Sheehan is simply one of their current victims.

Her son was killed by the current president's murderous policies. She wants explanations, and she wants to do something about it. WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH THAT? If it were my daughter, you can be damned sure I'd be doing the same thing, or more. I just cannot fathom the thought process that would lead someone to the conclustion that parents of killed soldiers should worship Bush or STFU. It makes no sense to me. There's really, really something wrong with that, and with some of you who consistently vilify her for having the nerve to speak up.

 

[heretic888]

No she hasn't. The right-wing political smear machine has done this. You can see it happening in this very thread. Any conscientious American citizen who dares to stir up a little dissent immediately becomes the target of focused attention of the same group of character-assassins behind the infamous and false "Swift Boat" tactics we saw during the last election. Mrs. Sheehan is simply one of their current victims.

While I'm not really all that concerned about Mrs. Sheehan's politics one way or the other....

Your comments suddenly reminded me of the 2000 Republican Presidential Primaries, in which a mudslinging campaign was directed against Senator John McCain, including accusations about his military record ("Swift Boat", anyone?) and rumors that he had a "black baby" ( ).

I'm sensing a trend.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

Her wealthy handlers and backers gave her a makeover, because they needed a 'goldstar mom' to push their agenda. It's all so pathetically artificial.

Exactly. Im sure there are other parents of the fallen who share Ms. Sheehans beliefs. Why is it that she is the one who gets funding? If theres a "right wing smear machine" its sharing space with the "left wing smear machine".

 

[Rich Parsons]

Ms. Sheehan was held in custody for four hours before being released. If she was not at the Station House, where would she have been?

And I resent the implication that I have less than an ounce of brains.

Michael,

I never once said you had less than one ounce of brains or tried to imply anything like that.

Yet, should I have a thread about me, for evertime I was held for 4 or more hours without being charged, and then let go? The answer is no.

Should I have a movie made about the fact that Michael Moore would not answer my questions, yet he makes fun and insults those that do not answer his questions when he shows up to a board meeting? The answer is no.

She has a right to her opinion. She has the right to express her opinion, with in the laws of the land. She has the right to make a specticle of her self and the media to pick her up.

 

[michaeledward]

Rich Parsons

The comment was made because of this post.

. . . Anyone with an ounce of brains knows that Cindy wants to get arrested . . .

I acknowledge that Ms. Sheehan took part in a display of civil disobedience in front of the White House last fall, in which one of her objectives was to get arrested.

I am not willing to acknowledge that Ms. Sheehan's objective at the State of the Union Address was to get arrested.

In fact, wouldn't have made more sense for Ms. Sheehan to remain in the gallery with that shirt displaying "2,242 Dead - How Many More?" during the address. The television camera's would have captured that for all of America to see. Wouldn't that have created more controversy than being arrested?

Rich Parsons, if you would like a thread about you any time you are arrested, held with charge, and then the charges dropped after a day, please feel free to start one. I'll play along, if it is interesting enough.

Ms. Sheehan has become a symbol for a Peace movement. More than 50% of the country now believe the war in Iraq was started on less than 'above-the-board' information.

Is then, it a legitimate question to ask, how many more American Soldiers are going to die? Did you hear the new Republican Majority Leader say Sunday morning that the War in Iraq is a "gift we are going to give our Grandchildren"? I thought we were told the conflict would take "Six Days, maybe Six weeks, I doubt Six Months" by the Secretary of Defense.... now it is a gift for our Grandchildren.

This war is wrong. It is illegal. And it is a fair question to ask, how long are we going to pay for it. With Cash, With Credit, With Lives?

 

[Jeff Boler]

Is it possible for you to stay on topic?

 

[michaeledward]

Is it possible for you to stay on topic?

Jeff Boler ... my response is on topic ...

Is it possible for you to contribute, rather than nag?

 

[Jeff Boler]

Jeff Boler ... my response is on topic ...

Is it possible for you to contribute, rather than nag?

The topic is Cindy Sheehan, not your crusade against the war. Therefore you are not on topic.

 

[michaeledward]

The topic of my post is:

Is Cindy Sheehan's question a fair one?

Regardless of personal opinions of Ms. Sheehan, is it legitimate to ask how many soldiers are going to end up like Ms. Sheehan's son? And, is it worth it?

If you can't recognize the question as distinct from the questioner, and the questioner from the question, well ... then, ... maybe you are just left to nag.



And kindly don't use the word 'crusade' when describing my point of view and this war. It is in exceedingly poor taste.

Oh, and there is this:
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/02/06/opinion/20060206_IRAQ_GRAPHIC.html

 

[jdinca]

No she hasn't. The right-wing political smear machine has done this. You can see it happening in this very thread. Any conscientious American citizen who dares to stir up a little dissent immediately becomes the target of focused attention of the same group of character-assassins behind the infamous and false "Swift Boat" tactics we saw during the last election. Mrs. Sheehan is simply one of their current victims.

Her son was killed by the current president's murderous policies. She wants explanations, and she wants to do something about it. WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH THAT? If it were my daughter, you can be damned sure I'd be doing the same thing, or more. I just cannot fathom the thought process that would lead someone to the conclustion that parents of killed soldiers should worship Bush or STFU. It makes no sense to me. There's really, really something wrong with that, and with some of you who consistently vilify her for having the nerve to speak up.

"The current President's murderous policies". Gosh, I'm just glad the left doesn't have a "political smear machine", or else they wouldn't be able to take the self righteous moral high ground they seem to have laid claim too.
Ms. Sheehan has every right to protest. Her son died protecting that right. Absolutely nobody has said that she doesn't have that right, even those she's protesting so mightily against. That said, do you consider hugging Hugo Chavez and making a number of anti-America comments a protest over her son's death?

As for the Swift Boat Veterans, they were protesting Kerry's Vietnam claims. They have that right, just as much as Cindy Sheehan does. I find it interesting that you consider this okay for her but you call the Swift Boats part of a smear machine. Sounds like you only want free speech for those you agree with, or am I misinterepreting your comments?