How about a letter-writing campaign to the news media....

[emdee]

to request (demand) that they cover Ms. Sheehan's story? After living through the media's Schiavo coverage, I cannot believe that this is the only place I'm getting news on Sheehan! And, I'm wondering if letters sent by snail-mail might cause more of a stir than emails????
emdee

[SteppingRazor]

1. As (I believe) the lone journalist among the DU Activists...

Oh God no! Not again! I'm still getting DSM letters, for Christ's sake! :evilgrin:

Actually, I've also already received about half a dozen Sheehan letters, just so you know. So, this is already being done in some quarters.

[emdee]

2. LOL - thanks for letting me know! n/t

n/t

[katinmn]

5. There are hundreds of journalists on DU!

you'd be surprised.

Lots of mainstreamers also.

[fooj]

3. I'm in! I'll be happy to fire off some e-mails!

Great idea. Make sure to include Schiavo, as well.

Peace.

[cbear70]

4. done

Been emailing for the past hour... I am sickened that the bride is on all the stations but nothing on Cindy.

[katinmn]

6. I agree and please don't mince words.

This is another concerted effort by corporate owned media to follow the * party line.

Remember that this is a highly concentrated industry whose owners are benefitting from the regime's theft of the national treasury.

We would not be in Iraq if it weren't for the media's duplicity.

[cloudythescribbler]

7. Here's a LTTE to the NY Times that doesn't mince words (won't get printed)

None of my well over fifty letters emailed to the
NY Times, indeed over fifty short and easily
printable letters during that time, unlike this one,
every have any chance of seeing print. So I just
use the forum to say things the way I like, and
send it around, tho not for publication:


SHOWCASE CONCERN

To the editor:

Radio talk show host Martha Zoller has
the gall to slyly insinuate, pursuant to a Republican
talking point, that given the presumably more positive
tone of Cindy Sheehan's comments made in June 2004
about her meeting with President George W. Bush, she
is somehow reneging by being so persistently critical
now.

First, as far as I am aware, no one has
seriously questioned the fact veracity of her account
of her meeting with the President, although there has
been ample opportunity and reason to do so, if her
account was in any way inaccurate. Second, there
are many possible inputs to the attitude of a mother
who has lost her son to a war she considers to be a
travesty. Although I cannot possibly purport to stand
in Ms. Sheehan's shoes, let alone speak for her, at
least two possibilities, not mutually exclusive,
come to mind:

On one hand, a person desperately seeking
reassurance can sometimes take, at least at first,
the showcase expressions of concern from those in
power, only to be disappointed when these turn out
to be the mere empty rhetoric that they always were.
On the other hand, a mother who has lost her son could
only feel, in a deep and personal way, the meaning of
the revelations in the Downing Street Memos I and II,
in a way the rest of us can only imagine. The jury-
rigged case for the war may be a subject for blase
commentators inside the beltway to note with little
surprise or emotion, but to someone in Ms. Sheehan's
position, could by themselves be sufficient basis for
even the volte-face those like Ms. Zoller only merely
insinuate.

There is a particular anger that I feel when
people use their expressions -- or possibly
protestations -- of humanitarian sentiment in certain
instances as a backboard to justify, overtly or
covertly, their disdain for such sentiment in others.
The driving force for such dichotomies, as here, is
typically simply political agenda -- with the moral
hypocrisy stinking to the heavens, and often beyond.

////////////// (aka "Cloudy")
/////////////
Springfield MA 01108


Earlier today I posted a handwritten letter
of support to Cindy Sheehan, as part of the Democratic Underground's "Action Corps", a group of over 1000 cyber-
activists at Democratic Underground.com.
We have such actions on a regular basis.

[cloudythescribbler]

8. here's the LTTE (Aug 10) that ticked me off & that I was answering

To the Editor:

Cindy Sheehan gave a very different account of her visit with President Bush in June 2004. There has been no president in modern times who has spent as much time meeting individually with families of military personnel who made the ultimate sacrifice.

I think the real issue is, Whom do you blame if your son dies and he volunteered for duty? In the days of the draft, you could blame the government. But if he volunteered and believed in the mission, whom do you blame?

My heart breaks for Ms. Sheehan and other mothers of the fallen. I deal with that by doing as much as I can for soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines and coasties during this war.

This is America's war and the world's war on terror. We are proud of the sacrifices of the fallen, and they are proud to have fought and died for Ms. Sheehan's right to question her president.

Martha Zoller
Gainesville, Ga., Aug. 9, 2005
The writer, a radio talk show host, visited with soldiers in Iraq in July.

• _____________________________________________
I was particularly incensed how she uses her photo ops with other soldiers as a credential leverage source against Cindy Sheehan. It is also the sort of thing that "Red Headed League" type progressives, ostensibly within the movement, do ALL the time, and it is infuriating

[NMMNG]

9. WTF?

There has been no president in modern times who has spent as much time meeting individually with families of military personnel who made the ultimate sacrifice.

As if! Chimpy is well known for not visiting a single funeral of a fallen soldier, and I doubt he's met with many of their families. He's too busy lounging on his ranch, riding his bike (or falling off it) and whatnot to be bothered with offering condolences to the families of the men and women he sent off to die. Commander Cuckoobananas is nothing but a cowardly sockpuppet.

[cloudythescribbler]

10. BS from a rightwing spinmeister? NEVER!