Cindy's message is HER'S! It doesn't matter who disagrees or agrees

[NoFederales]

because the focus should be on her right to DISSENT, to get that message out, and unfortunately, since few have taken the wherewithall to do so, exercise an individual's responsibility for PUBLIC oversight to make Bush ACCOUNTABLE!

Sure she's a grieving mother.
Sure she's upset others who disagree with her.
Sure she has thousands who support her.
Sure the pResident and his cabal despise what she represents--and FEAR HER FOR HER CAPABILITY TO GET ATTENTION against heavy odds.
And surely, the world is watching. . . .

This is why Cindy's effort is so compelling for dissenters; she's giving us an effective voice, a voice of compassion and of rationality. How dare we align ourselves AGAINST the misanthropes of this administration. How dare we not be silent.

Keep it up; be loud and speak truth to power, show your compassion with all the noisy conviction possible. That's what this is all about. And this moment must not slip away. Minimize the liars and their messages as you would a window screen on the computer--you're not forgetting it's there--but CELEBRATE the dissent which separates the ideology of us from them, and the OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO NOW. Carpe diem; Cindy is.

NoFederales

(spelling edit)

[benburch]

1. AMEN.

We cannot put words into her mouth. We cannot set her agenda. We have not right to do so.

And the people who are trying to hijack that event for their own purposes;

GO TO HELL

[NoFederales]

2. Exactly so! Celebrate HER dissent with her; your personal message will

also get out, just don't tramp on the moment.

NoFederales

[blondeatlast]

3. So true, and it needs to be shouted from the rooftops. Thanks. nt

[comsymp]

4. Well stated!

It's somewhat annoying to read the comments, here and elsewhere, by the armchair generals (on all sides of the issue) who nitpick, second-guess, and outright attack every comment she makes.

The woman has suffered what is generally accepted to be the worst tragedy a parent can face, and has channeled her grief into heroic action.

Our responsibility, as is any freedom-loving American's, is to defend her right to speak openly and without fear of government reprisal. Any additional support we're willing / able to offer is, albeit presumably welcome, not required. So if her message isn't good enough for our own keyboard warriors, I would suggest that they drag their own happy-go-lucky asses down to Crawford and push their own agendas. Otherwise, I would hope that those of us who agree with her views spend our time and energy defending her.

[NoFederales]

5. I agree; we should celebrate each others dissensions and passions

for continual support. We are defeated only when we cease to care. Antagonizing each other is as useless as sub-audible, cringing, moans.

Reserve the venom for the evil-doers, and make a joyful noise in so doing. Works for me.

NoFederales

[pat_k]

6. What's wrong with feedback/suggestions? Cindy can take or leave them.

What's wrong with feedback/suggestions? Cindy can take or leave them.

I posted Cindy, please mention Conyers May 5 letter and the 500,000+ that signed and don't see anything wrong with trying to get feedback or suggestions to Cindy.

Most folks here are giving her and her supporters all the material and moral support we can. Folks have made it clear that we are behind her and what she has to say 100%. Does being behind her mean that we have to keep our feedback or suggestions to ourselves? I don’t see why. She can take or leave anything anybody has to say.

By her own words, she has put herself out front as our voice. If some of those she speaks for have a message they would like her to carry, what is wrong with trying to let her know about it? Her voice is her own, but she might appreciate hearing and even adopt some of those messages. Is Cindy saying "shut up and sit down"? If she is, I haven’t heard it.

[NoFederales]

8. Certainly feedback and suggestions are admirable, it's when "should"

and "ought to", etc. become interjected that is problematic. Also, those folks with "their" agendas who mix and mingle in the melee of a demonstration can be distractions, but that will happen won't it? We can certainly daisey-chain all kinds of causes to Cindy's, but be careful we must.

Try to think of it like this: In a call to arms, the clarion horn signals such a pure note of need that response is immediate. But those return notes from the flanking forces are a signal that the beckoning has been heard and assistance is on the way. A leader's clarion call is stimulus to act together in concerted effort.

May the thrill of all of our clarion calls inspire us to action.

NoFederales

[pat_k]

9. Agree that focus is key. I think Conyers DSM questions are on topic.

I absolutely agree that focus is vital. I am often frustrated when people use an action on a particular subject -- for example, trustworthy elections -- to raise other issues of the day. Sure, social security, abortion, or whatever are important too, but I won't bring my voting rights sign to your SS rally if you don't bring your SS signs to my voting rights rally.

That said, I think Conyers DSM questions are right in line with the questions Cindy is asking Bush... and the nation. I don't consider my request/suggestion as attempt to "daisy-chain" some unrelated cause.

[formernaderite]

7. Agreed...the whole point is that her grief is apolitical...

and her fight with the admnistration is also apolitical...it's about what's right. She has the right to criticize anything she wants, I wish people would stop treating her like she has a campaign and election to win.