Let's move beyond Cindy NOW

[dannofoot]

Cindy Sheehan has been a terrific starting point for many in the anti-war movement, and a rallying cry for many of the rest of us who have been there from the beginning. But it is prudent to analyze her further impact, or negative impact, on how we wish to move forward to capturing more of the voting public's attention and empathy as we head to the 2006 elections and beyond.

The first thing that I see is this weekend's events...The RW attention, and thus much of the MSM's, has been on linking Cindy with ANSWER factions. For almost two months, they have linked her with anti-Israel factions, twisted her words - (why has there been no correction to her "this country is not worth dying for" statement-she was talking about Iraq!)- and fairly marginalized her as a 'Radical" status. The first weeks of Camp Casey were great...but then the polls began to swing due to MSM coverage. I have nothing against Cindy, but I feel that further exposure of her, alongside ANSWER-type elements, will only alienate those who agree with her message, certainly with average Americans.

Look, winning elections is the only way we are going to change the status quo. Cindy has already been defined by the MSM, and there's nothing we can do to change it. It's time to say thank you, but we've got to hang our hat on others now. That, or somehow get all of the hangers-on away from her and concentrate on her message that has become so diffused in the MSM- that the Iraq war is an illegal occupation that threatens our nation.

Sorry, but it all comes down to marketing; we cannot escape this. We cannot win without good marketing of our ideals, and Cindy's "brand" has been hijacked and used, spun and discombobulated by the RW and MSM. We have to move on now and focus our message, get the Democratic party behind it, and go after 2006 and 2008 with a concerted, concentrated message of how America will be better with us in charge.

[Skittles]

1. I don't think the RW's efforts to marginalize her have been successful

they look desperate when they are trying to twist her words

[dannofoot]

6. Please remember...

...the amount of mouth-breathing American voters that bought Reagan's "Morning in America" bullshit.

Please, can't you see the TV ads for 2008 now?

Republican Narrator:
Do you want to know what the Democrats believe is the future of our great nation?
(Video of Cindy Sheehan in front of thousands in D.C. Edit speech from one month before, VO cut: "this country is not worth dying for")
Republican Narrator:
That's what Hillary Clinton and Howard Dean believe...General Wesley Clark met with this woman...
(Video repeat of edited Sheehan speech: "This country is not worth dying for."
Republican Narrator:
Some of us DO think that America is worth dying for...Vote Republican in 2008."
Do you NOT think that this is what they'll do?

Do you NOT think that Joe American Mouth-Breather-Voter will believe them?

[Skittles]

10. such a distorted ad will not override the wreckage GWB will have left

not by a long shot

[cantstandbush]

118. No time to dump Cindy. We must be persistent and relentless.

They win by repeating the same message over and over and over again. So must we. It takes root and grows in the pshche. We need more families of military to help us repeat the message. More returning soldiers. We are right. They are not. War is not the answer, especially one so unnecessary and so based on lies.

[spacelady]

32. I know that Mouth-breather means republican mentally challenged idiots

who still believe in G.W. * as president, but there are nose-breathing challenged people such as myself who hate this farce of an administration just as much as any thinking human--so give us tiny olfactory nostril-hole patriots some credit!!

[dannofoot]

45. I do, of course!

But unfortunately, there have not been enough of us to win the past two presidential elections.

Face it, there are more of them that vote than us.

We need every piece of ammo to use against them, while denying them ammo against us.

Cindy on the stage with fringe ANSWER sects gives THEM ammo.

[Skittles]

48. bullshit

they own the voting machines and that helps them a GREAT deal

[Name removed]

74. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dannofoot]

77. At first, ...

...I thought that perhaps you were interested in winning elections against the Republicans.

Then I read your post, and realized, that maybe you're just interested in being angry.

I want the Republicans out of power. The way that I see it's done is by getting a massive amount of people to believe in, abd vote for, the Democrats. We obviously believe in different ways that that can be done, however.

[Name removed]

103. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sendero]

115. Aw..

... my post got removed, isn't that special. The sentiment remains.

[FreedomAngel82]

91. I also wanted to add

that a lot of people have changed their minds since 2004 as well! A lot more information has come out etc. See the Paul Hackett race in Ohio! And John Kerry definitley won 2004.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

111. Huh?

...there have not been enough of us to win the past two presidential elections...

I'm sure the fine folks at Diebold, ES&S, and Triad would agree with you.

[formernaderite]

113. So what? How about saying something honest for a change

and attracting the other half of the country that doesn't even bother to vote. Maybe they'd appreciate the frank talk? Screw the mouth breathers...

[FreedomAngel82]

90. Yes

All you have to do is look at the latest polls. This is why they're attacking her any way they can.

[dannofoot]

116. Yes, Freedom....

The polls show that the majority of Americans view the invasion and occupation of Iraq as a mistake.

But according to a new Rasmussen poll (Yes, everyone, I know that it's Rasmussen...so add 8% to their total) only 31% of those polled have a favorable view of Cindy Sheehan.

I'm simply being realistic when I write that her message has been co-opted enough already; the MSM is turning on her, and Democrats in leadership positions will begin to distance themselves from her more than ever.

The RNC, of course, will continue to slime her, and use her falling favoritism among Americans as paint to slather over every Democratic position regarding Iraq for the 2006 elections.

[Wickerman]

2. She has a lot of people worried

Many running scared doing whatever they can to discredit her.
So, I politely disagree. We need to support whatever strong voices appear.

[LittleClarkie]

95. I just hope we can distinguish between discredit and dissent

re Cindy, and not jump on the dissenters. No one should be above criticism, and not liking one comment or another shouldn't get someone labelled "anti-Cindy" just as criticizing the government shouldn't get one labeled "anti-American."

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[goclark]

8. Yep , spray needed

Cindy is doing just fine.

After that sorry Pro War Rally, the Freepers need to crawl in a hole and hide.

[dannofoot]

13. Maybe you should shower...

...what you smell is another's strong sense of reality from the Midwest.

Maybe I should reiterate...I have nothing but admiration and respect for Cindy.

My problem is with so many people hanging their hat on a message that has been fairly successfully twisted and usurped by the MSM. It was great, while it lasted.

Now she has all sorts of ANSWER baggage hanging around her neck, and it will be used to no end by the RNC.

And maybe you've never realized, but they're pretty damned good at sliming people, and making Amuurricans believe it.

[spacelady]

40. They slime, We climb over it.... Cindy is not done. n/t

[dannofoot]

43. Yeah, right...

...we climbed right over those "Swift Boat" assholes, didn't we?

How soon we forget.

[spacelady]

54. No one has forgotten, and I really do understand your trepidation

about hanging our message on one star, but Cindy Sheehan started a real backlash with the Crawford standoff & it has not been that long ago, so support for her and building support for her is not a disadvantage, it is an impetus.

[AntiCoup2K4]

81. Kerry was the only one who didn't climb over the Swift Boat Assholes....

....because his "handlers" from Big Al's "Centrism" Circus told him not to fight back.

[JaneGat]

4. Cindy 's voice has resonated powerfully with people.

People make the movement-- not the hamstrung corporate media or RW reaction.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dannofoot]

23. No, I'm..

...what's called a "realist" around my area.

We look at how things have gone over the last decade or so, and base our judgements on that.

And what is clear is that the RNC will take Cindy Sheehan, edit her previous sound bytes and proximity to the ANSWER folks this weekend, and make the Democrats look worse than Dukakis in helmet and tank drag.

Or do you think the Repubs are too kind for that? Or that maybe voters in Kansas won't believe them?

[Vickers]

100. Your kind of pussyfooting "realism" causes a loss of focus

Instead of discarding one of the few people brave enough to confront Bush, and charismatic and HONEST enough to glavanize people, why not embrace her and let folks see that the Democratic Party *stands* for something?

Your kind of "realism" sounds startlingly like the kind of bullshit the DLC spouts, and frankly it is Chamberlain-esque in its naivete.

Don't believe the media, pal; the tide is turning. I travel a lot around the country, and I'm even seeing it in places like Oklahoma.

[eleny]

7. No

Got it?

[despairing optimist]

9. It's the RW that have fixated on Cindy

It's their usual ad hominem approach. They can't fault Cindy's argument, so they attack her as the embodiment of various evils they see in her supporters. They try to marginalize her, but they only further marginalize themselves while doing so. More and more people are on to their game.

It sounds as if what you're saying is, since the RW and MSM have "defined" Cindy, we must dump her even though there is no one else who can speak out and say what she has been saying--i.e., the truth to power. How convenient that would be for Bush and the rest of the RW. You say we must move on. Please tell us in detail how to move on and focus our message, and tell us who in particular you think can do that job. Talking about getting the Democratic party behind something that doesn't exist is another sop to the GOP. I can't believe I'm reading this on DU. It's so defeatist, accepting RW and MSM criticisms of Cindy as givens and providing no alternatives.

Let's move beyond this kind of thinking now.

[dannofoot]

15. Dump? Did I say "dump?"

I don't believe I did.

But the RNC has an extremely good track record of framing one person's perfectly honest position to use against them.

Cindy's very proximity to the Mumia faction, anti-Israel factions, etc.,this weekend will be used in a thousand ways against the Democrats in 2006 and 2008. The longer she is kept in the spotlight, the longer the MSM will position her to be the "face" and "voice" of the Democrats. Or do you knot think that Karl Rove is that clever?

They will use Cindy's appearances to "Willie Horton" the Democrats to dath.

And again, I ask, since many of you seem to be in denial about this: Do you REALLY trust the American voters to see beyond their bullshit? They never have before.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dannofoot]

27. Sorry, ...

...a snide freeper referal doesn't do much to a solid Democrat of 40+ years.

"You say many DUers are in denial about Cindy. That puts us in good company, say the majority of Americans who support Cindy. It's you who are in denial of this fact."

Umm...actually the word "denial" is your spin on my post. I merely suggested that we should move on to a more focused message, as hers has become diluted by both the MSM and this weekend's rally when she was positioned with a number of messages from ANSWER that do not resonate with mainstream America (you know - the people that either vote or influence voters?). And although the majority of Americans are agianst the war, The polls on Cindy herself are rather mixed. Are you with ANSWER, by any chance?

"You are making the American public out to be mindless dupes of the Republicans, an insulting characterization more appropriate for conversations in Karl Rove's office than on DU."

Yeah, well...Apparently the majority of American voters ARE mindless dupes to Karl Roves conversations and machinations. Otherwise, someone else would be in office, wouldn't they?

[spacelady]

44. Do you have a better spokesperson in mind? Seriously.

[dannofoot]

47. Well, let's see...

How about one of those elected Democrats?

YOu know, one that was against the war....oh, sorry, that really limits our choices, doesn't it?

Hey...how about one of them speak honestly, and with courage for a change? Get off their bended knee to * and start telling the truth?

God, would that be refreshing or what?

[spacelady]

52. Well, until they grow some cojones--we've got Cindy. n/t

[despairing optimist]

59. You're a solid Democrat? No wonder the party's in so much trouble.

First, you're willing to tell Cindy, "Thanks for your help, but you're no help anymore because Rove, the GOP, and the media have defined you and we can't do anything about that. The American public is too gullible and dumb to care who you really are and what you really stand for." Then you say we need to move on without telling us where and without suggesting who can lead this party with no leader and no direction. Some Democrat of 40 years. What did you say to George McGovern and Eugene McCarthy? I bet you backed Humphrey. Great move, there. And Democrats are supposed to follow YOU? Where?

You're very good at spinning when you accuse me of spin. You claim that the almighty Karl Rove, in imminent danger of indictment and losing credibility with the MSM daily, will nevertheless don his Svengali costume once more and produce media consensus on Cindy as a member of the loony left. I disagree; Rove isn't God, and Democrats shouldn't be in his church, not even the back pews. What is the "more focused message" that you suggest Democrats lead with, and again, who should be the leader among them to put forth that message? Snide "umm" comments from the likes of you are not concrete proposals. Cindy is there, she has a message, she's communicating that message, and she's connecting with the majority of Americans. And no, I'm not associated with ANSWER at all, although if you represent most Democrats, which I very much doubt, maybe I should give ANSWER a look.

And no, the majority of Americans are not mindless dupes of Karl Rove. If you're so sure of the opposite, why bother voting at all? Just let Rove and his successors pilot the country wherever they want to because it is pointless to resist. You surrender Cindy Sheehan because in your mind they will redefine her. What makes you think that they won't succeed in doing the same to anyone else who opposes them?

You have set up a tautology here. No one can persuade you otherwise because you have set up an argument that you feel is invulnerable to defeat. I have asked you for suggestions about leaders and positions that you think would make successful substitutes for what you believe is far-left extremism on the part of Cindy Sheehan and her supporters. You have answered with nothing but arrogance. Arrogance is not an argument. Put up or shut up, O wise one. Don't keep the secret of Democratic salvation to yourself. We await enlightenment, though we are but lowly sinners all.

[FreedomAngel82]

93. More focused message?

WTF have you been? The message is about ending the damn war! If you don't see that then stop listening to rightwing radio! You claim you're a realist but obviously not.

[tkmorris]

22. Do I trust Americans to see past the bullshit?

No. No I don't, not without help. That's not the point though.

Do you think the Repub tactic will change if stop talking about Ms. Sheehan and move on to someone or something else? It won't ya know. No matter what person, policy, or idea we put forth they will sling feces at it like drunken schizophrenic baboons. Moving the spotlight won't change that one iota. Our job is to show that tactic for what it is and keep ourselves clean.

Don't be afraid of Karl Rove or any of the rest of them. When you are right you are right. Or would you rather allow the Republican Party dictate to us who represents our values and beliefs? I will decide who speaks for me, not Karl, nor George, nor big Dick or Catkiller. Me.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

28. Did I just read this? You're saying Cindy=Willie Horton?

What makes you so afraid of her? MKJ

[dannofoot]

34. Umm, please reread...

...my posts.

And remember what you may have learned about "subtext" and "metaphors."

Yes, the RNC will use Cindy Sheehan as a "WIllie Horton." It's a METAPHOR. It means that they will link her edited soundbytes, her appearances on stage with Democrats and in front of Democrats, her meetings with Democrats, etc. to paint all Democrats as "radical fringe."

Have you paid attention to what they do over the past 20 years? Have you paid attention to how voters eat it up?

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

37. Thanks so much for the enlightening lesson in literary devices.

I'm grateful that someone of your advanced intellect would deign to mingle with us simple folks.

Gosh, those mean ol' repubs don't like her, now I see. We need our high profile activists to be someone the repubs like and thusly won't attack, otherwise, we'll never win.

Hmmm, interesting argument. MKJ

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

46. I paid attention to the compliment you paid Rove.

You think he's "clever". I think he's an amoral bully who will do whatever he can to see that his guy wins.

We'll discuss his "cleverness" after the Fitzgerald investigation indictments come down. MKJ

[FreedomAngel82]

92. It seems to me

you're more worried about what other people will think. The people who are closed minded about everything won't vote for democrats anyway. If Cindy Sheehan is their only reasoning for not voting for a democrat then they probably wouldn't have in the first place. It seems to care you only seem interested in an image. Who cares? If people want to listen to rightwing asses they already do. If they want the truth about Cindy they will look for it themselves.

[NVMojo]

11. People hate women leaders, don't be one of those hatemongers.

[GreenPartyVoter]

12. Marketing? What good is marketing when

republicans own the voting machines? x(

[bettyellen]

14. you're joking right?

:rofl:

[dannofoot]

18. Not joking, are you serious...

...about winning elections?

I am.

Cindy Sheehan is not going to win us elections.

I live in a red area of a blue state. Lots of teetering Repubs here. We need spokespeople whom the MSM can't twist, can't align with fringe groups, can't denigrate due to overexposure.

Look, everyone sympathized with Beth Hollway Twitty. Millions wanted to invade Arubva to find her daughter.

Two months later, the polls show that the majority of her former supporters are saying, "Look, go on with your life, we are."

Such is the American attention span. I'm saying that we should move on from Cindy as a focal point, because she has lost her resonance with the Americans we want whose minds we need to change.

She will never lose her resonance with us. That is a given.

But we need to win elections. We need to get the Democrat cowards in in the House and Senate to find their voice. We need leadership from those that are suposedly LEADING.

[New Earth]

19. Cindy's not trying to win us elections

She's trying to end an unjust war :wtf:

[Peggy Day]

21. maybe you should concentrate all that energy on the voting machines n/t

[Booster]

24. As much as I hate to, I agree with you. The average American

attention span is about a minute and a half; anything beyond that and they (us included) become annoyed, just as we became annoyed with the Natalie/Aruba story. Cindy needs to stay in to speak, but we can't put all our hopes on just her back. We need a real leader to step forward within the next year. Someone not extreme, just logical. Logic could blow the neocons out of the water because their thinking is anyting but logical.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

25. As I watched General (ret) Clark on Fox, calmly rebutting O'Lielly's

attempt to slime her and castigate Clark for meeting with her, I continued to observe the utter frustration the RW has regarding her vocal honesty.

I'm not sure why you are so eager to jettison someone who connects with so many of us and, furthermore, has the RW'ers with their knickers in a twist.

And I really don't see how the mom of the Arruba teen ties in.

BTW, the RW'ers talking heads would have a field day with "she's so fill-in-the-blank the Democrats want nothing to do with her."

Our side of the political spectrum should continue to welcome and embrace her, all the other Gold Star families, the Veterans for Peace and all others who have shouldered the burden of this horrific war.

MKJ

edited to add, just found this thread, re: freeps with twisted knickers


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4885567

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bettyellen]

26. let's see, we replace people every two months because they are too well

known and thus a target? and we shld take lessons from murder victims in aruba and hey, perhaps the runaway bride could help us out too?
like i said. :rofl:
sorry you're buying into this crap. don't blasme cindy that others aren't out there saying their piece.
it ain't an either or thing, there are always room for more good people, without putting others out to pasture. she was amazing on TV this morning, ran circles around the interviewer. a lot of politicians should learn from her.

[dannofoot]

30. Betty, I wish I'd...

...seen that interview. I've heard other interviews where she was not prepared for the questions, and quickly ended the interview. Hopefully she has learned what to expect by now.

But tell me, Betty, what "crap" am I buying into? Knowing the attention span of Americans? Knowing that the longer you hang out there, without a focused message (and Cindy's has been hijacked this weekend), the easier target you are for detractors? That the longer you get marginalized by the MSM, so does your message?

I want to win in 2006 and 2008. I don't even want it to be close; I want to bury the Repubs so far that they won't even see daylight until 2020. And for that to happen, we need to appeal to the majority of voters in this country. And having Cindy Sheehan's main coverage this weekend be put in perspective with Free Mumia,liberation of Puerto Rican disidents, etc., does NOT appeal to the voting public.

Or do you buy into the crap that it does?

[spacelady]

38. I believe the MSM such as it was, tried to marginalize Martin Luther King,

Jr., The Hippies, The Yippies, Woodstock, The Anti-War Movement, The Civil Rights Movement, The Feminist Movement, need I go on? And those sentiments have not been shut down in these decades, in fact they still resonate with the work that still needs to be done. That is why Cindy Sheehan is still a relevant driving force for change, because she is the ONLY ONE who has bravely stood up to the regime and caught the attention (finally) of Joe Blow and making the apathetic public rethink their priorities. So, no she is still very much a force for change.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

41. Nicely said, spacelady. n/t

MKJ

[loudsue]

80. You've WHAT????????

"I've heard other interviews where she was not prepared for the questions, and quickly ended the interview."

I've seen dozens or a hundred Cindy interviews. She has always stayed on message, and has NEVER bought into the spin that people were trying to catch her in.

You know why? Because she's simply TELLING THE TRUTH as she knows it.

It's not a "dem" thang.
It's not a "repuke" thang.

It's the damn truth. And she knows what her truth is, and she says it.

That's why she's so effective!

You, on the other hand, don't know what your "truth" is. You're so busy trying to dodge the repuke bullets, you've gotten yourself in a little hissy-huff about what things "look like".

Things are either the truth, or they're not. Cindy tells the truth. The media....NOT.

:kick:

[FreedomAngel82]

97. Exactly

Cindy does all sorts of interviews. The only person I'm aware of that she hasn't answered an interview for is Bill O'Reilly with good reasoning. Why should she give him her time of the day?

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FreedomAngel82]

96. I guess you missed the little thing

called "voting machine." If you believe George Bush won the 2004 election then you are very much a realist. If you don't want to be associated with Cindy Sheehan then don't. But majority of Americans do agree with her. You still have yet to give any type of soultion(s) besides your anti-Cindy remarks.

[kentuck]

16. Cindy could make "guest" appearances and....

be as popular as Elvis... :)

[win_in_06]

17. Cindy is here to stay. Mainstream dems would do well to embrace

her and her merits because the other side is sure going to try and use her like a club against us.

Just watch.

[AirmensMom]

29. The RW and MSM could make Jesus Christ look like Beelzebub.

They can twist things, but they cannot define a person. Cindy has been through pain that most of us can't even imagine. Through it all, she has emerged as a woman with a mission. I, for one, appreciate everything she is doing. It's possible that she will save the lives of my kids. The RW and MSM can twist what she says, but they won't stop her. We could use a little of her tenacity.

[dannofoot]

36. You're damn right!

"We" could use a little of her tenacity!

Like, maybe,our elected Democrat House and Senate members?

Unfortunately, they CAN define a person. Give me an example where the MSM, in conjunction with the RNC, has not "defined" a person.

Most recently, they did it with a bunch of dirtbags known as the "Swift Boat Veterans." They are doing it to Cindy Sheehan. Where for weeks they couldn't denigrate her because of her pure message, it's gotten REALLY easy for them lately. This is largely due to sycophants with competing messages jumping on the bandwagon, diluting her message, and giving the RNC and MSM ammunition.

We cannot let her message become a liability, but because of reasons I stated above, it may well become that.

[loudsue]

83. "We cannot let her message become a liability." Who's "we"???

If the entire rightwing government can't stop her, and boosh is running scared all over the country to get away from her, you think some dizzy punk posting on DU is going to stop her?

Who in the hell is "we"?????

I for one, wouldn't even TRY to stop a mother from saying that her son died for a lie, and that she doesn't want anyone else to die for that same lie.

I wouldn't if I could, and I wouldn't have ANY desire to try to stop her.

[dannofoot]

89. "We" is us, and...

..."we" need to stop the ANSWER people that have been hanging around her and forcing their multitude of messages onto hers, as witnessed this weekend. "We" could also refer to those around here who might read these threads, to be careful about having her make statements about Israel. It may be what she believes, but again, do you want to only rev up the base, or change minds?
I have no desire to stop her message. I have the desire to stop her from being made a fool of, and thus the message. Appearing on stage with the ANSWER antics might excite some Democrats, but it sure isn't going to sway a red-state voter.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

107. OK, I'll try once more. When she was in Crawford, there were no ANSWER

people buzzing around her.

She has affiliated herself with VFP and the Gold Star Families. She spoke at a rally ANSWER had arranged,as did many other none-ANSWER folks, and she stayed "on message" when she spoke.

The scenario you paint in the above post seems to indicate you think she is immersed in ANSWER's agenda, when, in fact, she has established ties with other organizations.

I'd ask that you research her activist background a bit, before drawing incorrect assumptions about her affiliations. MKJ

[thebigidea]

112. you have absolutely no right ot speak for "we," "us," or anyone...

... but yourself. It comes off as extremely pompous and presumptious to think otherwise.

[AntiCoup2K4]

84. The elected House & Senate members knew the rally was taking place...

They could have shown up. Only Conyers & McKinney did. But I'm guessing you don't like them much either, right?

[dannofoot]

86. I like them just fine.

But as I posted before, they are not going to excite anyone beyond the base. And frankly, I don't believe that the Democratic Party officials think of them as their "leaders" either; do you?

[FreedomAngel82]

99. What the hell?

Her message is to end the damn war! Do you want the war ended or not?! Good grief! Seems to me you don't really care at all about her message which is to end the freakin war!

[Armstead]

31. No -- She's free to do what she wants. You're free to ignore her.

I am very well aware of the need to reach out beyond preaching to the choir. And I am no fan of ANSWER.

But I'll be goddamned if I think we should bob and weave based on what the right wing spinners and the ho's in the media decide who is "acceptable."

That kind of shrinking violet attitude is what got us into this mess in the first place.

[bemildred]

33. No. nt

[Vektor]

35. That's going to happen with everything we do, is the problem.

The Repukes spin every statement we make, smear every spokesperson we have, slander every politician who takes our side. It's not Cindy, or Howard Dean, or John Kerry, or Bill Clinton, or Al Gore or any other person that has been accused of "tainting" our message that is damaging public opinion of our causes. It's the lies and smears and spin that the hypocrites on the other side attach to anything that's Democratic.

We don't go out of our way to tell lies about them, but they do it to us constantly. The reason we come up looking bad when they start the spin machine is because they fight dishonest and dirty.

It's not Cindy, it's THEM.

[dannofoot]

42. Thank you, Vektor...

That's what I was saying in my original post, and in those beyond.

"It's not Cindy, it's THEM."

However, many here didn't get that. And to answer a previous poster here...if what it takes is to "bob and weave," get another messenger out there every few weeks...yeah, whatthehellever it takes. There is no alternative.

Do you expect the RNC to play nice? To follow standard rules of marketing and debate?

[spacelady]

51. And once again, we let "THEM" frame the argument, I don't think so.

There are many people more articulate than you or I about Iraq "War" policy, but I have not seen anyone capture a following like Cindy Sheehan and your necessary questioning only makes backing her and her force for change more unequivocably righteous. Whoa, I'll calm down.

On Edit: I just got so wrapped up in using all these big words that I never get to use, I was afraid that someone would say I needed to be obsolete, because Nobody could understand my position and maybe I should just go home and attend to my family and bake cookies or else someone with an agenda might distort the message.

[BrewerJohn]

55. Get another messenger out there every few weeks?

That's playing defense, which commands no respect. And also allows THEM to rack up an endless series of 'kills', leaving the impression with the impressionable that all of our messengers are ultimately tainted. Remember, they've slimed every messenger who has crossed them for years now.

What does work is not to lend the sliming credence. When they start that crap, respond immediately and decisively, expose the lies, laugh at them for being so ridiculous, and keep going.

That's actually one of the things that has made Cindy so effective. She is not a politician, so has not been initiated in the political culture of "safety" and defensiveness. She hits back, and keeps going. Did you catch her rapid response to Rove recently?

<edited for added nuance>

[dannofoot]

60. Brewer, I respectfully disagree...

throwing offense at them constantly is not playing defense. Even their slime machine must have limits to what it can produce...they can't defend every deep pass.

The question must be asked: Why were there NO Democratic leaders at this weekend's rally (sorry to those that think of the Democrats that were there as Democratic leaders; they're not)?

Because they were afraid to be associated with the rally, that's why. They knew that ANSWER's clowns would hijack the message, suck up the press coverage, etc. And if they were there, all of that would be used by the RNC in ads against them.

And our same loveable neighbors who got teary-eyed over "Morning in America" would suck up it up and vote accordingly.

And yes, I did catch Cindy's response to Rove; I read it on the Huffington post. But how many outside of our base read it?...sometimes I get the impression that DU folks believe that because they see and read things, that mainstream voters do, too. It's the same feeling I get when listening to Fox News viewers...they really believe that because O'Lielly has the highest rated cable show, he speaks for America. They're always stunned when I inform them that his audience is only slightly above 1% of the American population.

[despairing optimist]

63. Do you have anything positive at all to say about any Democrats

who participated at the rally, who supported Cindy Sheehan? All you're saying here is negative criticism with nothing constructive. Where are your alternative leaders and policies?

You say there were "NO Democratic leaders at this weekend's rally . . . they're not" leaders because you say they're not and you don't want them to be because your autistic universe would collapse if anyone believed other than you do.

You freely strike down anyone and anything not in accord with your views without putting forth any positive suggestions. All you are doing is sowing doubt in DUers' minds with nothing positive to replace it.

I'm not falling for this nonsense, and I hope no one else reading this will either.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

66. I do find it interesting that in light of the huge turnout at the anti war

march, in DC and other places, and in light of the sad counterprotest today, that someone would exhort us to turn away from Cindy Sheehan, of all people.

The timing is sort of odd. Just saying. MKJ

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dannofoot]

71. So many posts, and such invective.

My "autistic universe would collapse." I'm sorry, but that is so perfectly over-the-top that I'm going to have to use it. Soon.

If you really believe that the Democratic leaders at this weekend's rally can motivate voters beyond the Democratic base, well, I'm going to have to suggest that yours is another universe as well.

As I stated in a previous post, I live in a red area of a blue state. I have a pretty good idea of what it takes to get Republican voters to see the light. And I see no difference in what the Democrats are doing now than what has failed in the past several elections.

First of all, there is not a coherent voice...are you in disagreement with that? The prevailing issues should be an illegal war, unfair taxation, health care...issues that are consistenly at the top of voters' concerns. We hear nothing but mewling vacillation from elected Democrats.

"But what is your answer?!" you demand. My demand, as I put it to my elected reps and senators, is to start speaking for their constituents. As I'm sure you do, I communicate with those in office.

Beyond that, I only offer my opinion on what I believe to be an opinion board. I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with an angry soul over my Dem credentials, you're not worth it. Call me a troll, I could care less. I know what people's opinion's in my part of the country...and unfortunately, Cindy has reached that critical point of celebrity with them: They loved her, they rooted her to the top...but now they'll enjoy the schadenfreude as the MSM and RNC take her down. And that will be a very sad thing to witness.

[loudsue]

85. "First of all, there is not a coherent voice." YES, THERE IS!!!

And her name is Cindy Sheehan!

[despairing optimist]

98. The coherent voice about the war is Cindy's. The rally was about the war,

and other issues were raised that placed the war in perspective. The same approach to government that has been applied to health care, taxation, "homeland security" (a code word for civil rights curtailments, among other things), and entitlement programs has also been applied to foreign policy, particularly the invasion and occupation of Iraq. There is no one spokesperson for all these issues among the Democrats and therefore no coherent voice because no one agrees on who should fill the role. Howard Dean? Harry Reid? Barack Obama? Rahm Emanuel? Barbara Boxer? Nancy Pelosi? Hillary Clinton? Wesley Clark? Al Gore? Many heads and sounds but no one voice, and each has his or her own baggage.

You want the politicians you elected to speak for their constituents, but they have already spoken for them by voting however they chose to vote on those issues. If they voted wrong, they should be voted out of office and replaced by people who will vote in better accordance with their constituents, but perhaps these constituents are content with Republican representation in their district and that reality is not to your liking. The Democratic party cannot be rebuilt by the same people who keep suppressing any chance for coherence that arises, such as the opportunity to seize the Iraq war issue and combine it with the criminally inadequate response to Katrina. They are no party leaders who will not at least share a stage with Cindy Sheehan and validate her cause while at the same time transform it into something greater. Cindy may not be the messiah, but she hasn't roamed the halls of Congress and sold her soul either.

I think it's Cindy's political purity that troubles you. She isn't a politician and never pretended to be. That makes her vulnerable to those like Rove who would try to smear her and take her down. You want to replace her with DINO politicians who can't stand for anything because they are made to feel they must stand for everything. If what it takes for Republican voters in your area to see the light is for Democrats to become ersatz Republicans, then the price is too high for the party. It wouldn't be worthwhile for the Democrats to lose the rest of a blue state in order to gain a part of it. May I suggest moving to the blue area, if that would help you see how showing Cindy the door would be throwing out the baby with the bath water? As it is, you may be doing Sisyphus's work and inadvertently Rove's by wasting your energy on a lost cause. It may be best to focus on maintaining and building Democratic support in the rest of your state, and you'd probably be a lot happier and better adjusted.

You may not like the voices you're hearing among the Democrats, but I fear that if the Democratic leadership takes your counsel, it will accelerate the decline of the party by alienating the party's base. A party without a base is an empty tent built on quicksand. Perhaps, then, we should all join the Republican party and throw our weight around there. They would have less luck enforcing ideological rigidity and would find themselves subject to the same divisive forces now plaguing the Democrats.

If you find me and my comments not worth it, I must ask your purpose sharing your opinions on this board. Again, if you came here with an open mind, please don't keep it from me, but I sense that your mind was already made up and you have a deep-felt need to attack those who strongly disagree with you for no apparent motive other than self-gratification. Perhaps you're discouraged by your own situation, but that's no reason to criticize me or anyone else on DU for feeling encouraged by ours, or to sow doubt in us to win a red area of a blue state and lose the opportunity to provide a clear alternative to the GOP in the process. Being considered not worth it by you is the best compliment I've had in years, for I wish no part of someone who calls himself a Democrat and ridicules the efforts of progressive elements whose success this weekend is plain to all who would see it. Efforts to appease Republicans produce bad Democrats. That is the lesson of the past 30 years, and it's time to heed it and move on, or to change party affiliation and let go.

EDIT: I just saw your comment about my being a brownshirt. I think those types in your red area of your blue state are coloring your own judgment, not mine. I take offense at someone coming onto DU with little more than criticism and arrogance, shooting down anyone's attempts at accommodation with ridicule and snide comments, and reserving the right to feel superior by virtue of his supposed longstanding support of the Democratic party. If you're the future of the party, the worst is yet to come. You offer no hope at all to the younger generation on here, only more of the same failed efforts to accommodate voters predisposed to vote Republican by pushing the Democrats further to the right than they already are. If you're calling me a brownshirt, then it's clear you ought to know. I defer to your authority on that subject without hesitation.

[BrewerJohn]

73. Throwing offense constantly is what I'm talking about

The other path has everyone saying "Oh, you said I freed Willie Horton, I can't counter that and I'm damaged goods now, I'll just sit down and shut up". It's weakness and ultimately cowardice. The slime machine only works because those who go along to get along allow it the power.

The Democratic leaders who were afraid to be associated with the rally...were afraid. That's my point exactly. And they are able to get messages out well beyond the reach of the liberal blogosphere, if they had what it takes to counter the spin. They can hold press conferences with the corporate media. They can appear on the Sunday shows and get their message across, and hold the corpo-hosts' feet to the fire if they try their usual tricks. If they had the stuff.

But beyond that is the fact that hardly any of the leaders actually oppose the war (in the sense of wanting to end it without needless delay) in the first place, so most of this is really moot.

[zulchzulu]

39. I say we let the clowns and hangers-on leave the room

It was obvious that A.N.S.W.E.R. was going to make Cindy Sheehan into some kind of sideshow.

In short, we need another way to organize beyond them. Perhaps local DFA marches...but it's going to take more than marches to keep Cindy's message, now polluted by too many voices, too many chefs in the kitchen, too many charlatans looking more for the spotlight than the real reasons.

Cindy's real "brand" is simply her and her loss for her son and the need to have Bush admit he lied about reasons for the war.

The MSM will always try to denigrate people like Cindy. People who have independently figured out what's going on and know the truth see past their lies.

Let the message of Cindy carry on. Who cares about the MSM and the RW.

[Arkana]

49. Oh, puh-leeze.

"Let's not make the Republicans mad! They might hurt us! Run away!"

No. Cindy Sheehan has done more for our cause than I think anyone could have envisioned, and I don't think any amount of new smear will stick to her--except to the small minority who already believe she's evil.

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

62. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

72. No spinning necessary...

Your OP with the "let's say thank you, but" approach you'd like to see us take:

Cindy has already been defined by the MSM, and there's nothing we can do to change it. It's time to say thank you, but we've got to hang our hat on others now.

Your "oh, no, now that RW has tainted her "brand", we need to "move on" from her.

We cannot win without good marketing of our ideals, and Cindy's "brand" has been hijacked and used, spun and discombobulated by the RW and MSM. We have to move on now and focus our message, get the Democratic party behind it, and go after 2006 and 2008 with a concerted, concentrated message of how America will be better with us in charge.

A couple of posts reminding us of why we should be very afraid of the repubs, and reminding us that we shouldn't forget the cleverness of Rove.

And maybe you've never realized, but they're pretty damned good at sliming people, and making Amuurricans believe it

The longer she is kept in the spotlight, the longer the MSM will position her to be the "face" and "voice" of the Democrats. Or do you knot think that Karl Rove is that clever?

Your "metaphorical" comparison of Cindy to Willie Horton

They will use Cindy's appearances to "Willie Horton" the Democrats to dath.

And your exhortation that we must find a spokesperson who is so perfect that the scary RW can't possibly make stuff up about or slime them. (Calling Mary Poppins).

Cindy Sheehan is not going to win us elections.

I live in a red area of a blue state. Lots of teetering Repubs here. We need spokespeople whom the MSM can't twist, can't align with fringe groups, can't denigrate due to overexposure.

MKJ

[dannofoot]

76. Wow. Now I know...

...what happens when you piss off someone from ANSWER.

Soryy, you're not ALL asshats.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

78. Well, you use your first OP to promote withdrawing support from Cindy

Sheehan at the same time that FR is lamenting the fact that they don't have their "own" Cindy Sheehan,so it does tend to focus attention.

Of course, your response is about what I expected. When confronted by your own words, you decide to "make up" something about me.

MKJ

[dannofoot]

79. I have no idea...

...what freepers are lamenting, other than that they are now world-famous for their poor spelling on posters.

A far as "making up" something, I wasn't the one who accused another poster of being a troll.

And "withdrawing support" is again your spin. Support her all you want. I've merely been pointing out that her message has gotten emeshed with ANSWER messages, which does no good to either her, the message, or reaching more voters.

[Name removed]

87. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LittleClarkie]

94. The black and whiteness sometimes bugs me

I can support Cindy without thinking she's continually golden. Just as I can support the troops and not like what they're being made to do, or criticize my president and still be an American.

There is a somewhat disturbing iconization of the woman that seems to be going on. God bless her for speaking out, but that doesn't make her infallable. And nobody is above criticism. Not bashing, criticism.

That said, it might be alittle weird to say "move beyond Cindy." If she does something spiffy again like Camp Casey, folks will be there.

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[southlandshari]

53. We can stick to our principles AND win elections

I understand exactly where you are coming from. People who cannot connect with mainstream America are not going to win. Period.

However. Strong, clear voices do connect with mainstream America. Individuals who stay committed to their message, no matter how hard their opponents try to shake them or discredit them or ridicule them - these people do connect with mainstream America. Problem is, we just don't see these people very often these days.

I'm nowhere near far left politically, and I live in the reddest of red states in the Deep South. I've also worked for years in marketing and PR-related fields. And I believe that if we can't stick with our support for someone like Cindy Sheehan when the going gets rough, we might as well pack it in now.

The worst thing to do is to let the right-wing define us, our leaders, our issues. They push, we push right back. They co-opt the media, we fight to take it back rather than abandon it as if the MSM is beneath us. They try to discredit people who clearly are credible and have a message worth listening to - we up our support, we raise our voices louder, we don't run away in search of a more "acceptable" face.

Let me say this - I am speaking specifically about Cindy Sheehan, and wouldn't say the same thing about many others, including our last presidential candidate. I do share your thoughts about not blindly endorsing people who cannot connect with a larger base than we currently have.

ANYONE who opposes the current administration and gains any kind of visibility in the MSM is going to face nasty attacks by experts at dirty politics. That alone isn't reason enough to dump someone. If they stay on message in the face of the RW smear machine, I'm going to stay right there with them with my unabashed and unashamed support.

[bluedawg12]

58. This is a great point::

"The worst thing to do is to let the right-wing define us, our leaders, our issues. They push, we push right back. They co-opt the media, we fight to take it back rather than abandon it as if the MSM is beneath us. They try to discredit people who clearly are credible and have a message worth listening to - we up our support, we raise our voices louder, we don't run away in search of a more "acceptable" face."

We need to beat them at their game--meaning, getting our message to be as inspiring to others new to it, as it for us.

We also have to stop the RW from putting words in our mouth, and defining us. We do that by a strong and quick response to lies.

[dannofoot]

64. Shari, how can we now...

...disconnect Cindy's message from the ANSWER connections, the twisting of her words in the MSM, etc.? How do we "unring" the bell?

Can we get her to say "ENOUGH!" to all of the hovering activists, trying to get their speech in, from buzzing in her ears? Can we erase the archive of edited soundbytes from the RNC's files?

Do you know how the pure message of "Iraq is an illegal occupation" can be brought back, by her? I'd love to see it...I loved watching it, when it was that: Cindy at Camp Casey, scores gathered there for that message. It's unfortunately beyond that now, and the ANSWER asshats that hijacked her message this weekend aren't going to help get that message back on track.

[southlandshari]

67. I'm guessing that the majority of Americans

make no connection between Cindy Sheehan and ANSWER at this point. It's been discussed at great length here, of course, and I'm sure on other political message boards on the web. But I'm sure the vast majority of people in this country were doing other things this weekend and didn't attend or watch coverage of the march and rally.

So, I guess my answer to your question is pretty simple and probably not very profound. We just continue to support Cindy Sheehan AND her clear and focused message just as we did before. And not worry too much about the fact that she shared the podium with a group that some aren't happy with, or that her message was lost in the shuffle. I don't think it was. Or at least it won't be if WE refuse to let it be lost, marginalized, ignored or discredited.

[dannofoot]

75. I hope you're right...

...but as one poster has continuosly spouted on this thread, I'm obviously just a negative, Cindy-hating, troll!

And I thought all the Brownshirts were in freeperville...sigh.

Yet we all know how the MSM works. They build you up, they love you, and then they relish in the next big story: your media-perpetuated downfall. They won't stay on YOUR message, you become THEIR message.

Unfortunately, some here son't believe that the media has any power to influence people's opinions, or their behavior. They believe that the "marketing" of ideas is something foul, that we can turn the tide of history by our honesty and noble virtues alone. Obviously, if that were true, AL Gore would be president today. It takes controlling the message, carefully. And granted, people will differ as to how that should be done.

But it has to be done, and correctly. The alternative is too frightening to envision.

[southlandshari]

82. You make valid points for discussion, though I disagree with some of them

I don't agree at all that Cindy Sheehan is now "damaged goods" for us and should be abandoned or marginalized. On the other hand, I certainly agree that issues like the MSM's treatment of people with an anti-war message - and how that may impact the "average" American - are extremely important issues for us here.

I'll say to you and to everyone else posting on this thread - let's stay on topic and cut out the personal attacks, troll accusations, and the use of words like freeper or brownshirts. See a post that violates DU's rules on civility or content? Hit alert, don't respond, and move on to the next step of the conversation on the issue at hand.

There just isn't any need for anyone here to rack up post deletions while they could be engaged in a lively and productive debate on an important issue for all of us.

My two pennies, anyway.

[tomg]

56. Let the RW try and smear her all

they want. When the average American parent sees Cindy Sheehan, they see their sister-in-law, their cousin, their aunt. They might disagree with her ( although a look at the polls would suggest they don't), but they don't question her honesty. My nephew ( well, cousin - large Irish Catholic family so aunts/uncles thing is generational) just got his orders for Iraq. Half my family ( cousins, aunts, uncles, large and, as I said Irish Catholic) are old-line Dems; half are old-line Republicans. Our family is about 80% against the war, and 20% "finishing the mission" (these are people I love, and they are sincere in their beliefs, hence the phrase). You think any of us see Cindy Sheehan and don't pray to God that we never have to suffer what she has? And when she said that having one more person die because Casey already died is the worst possible reason to continue a war, you think anyone is going to call her on that.
In fact, who says she has to be prepared for interviews? She's a parent, not a marketing logo. If we move away from her and others like her, we lose our souls. And if we do it for marketing reasons, shame on us.
Incidentally, so what about ANSWER? The worst that can be said about them, at least from my point of view, is that they have too many speakers who are talking about what appears to be to some tangential issues. Yeah, yeah, they are Troskyite/ Marxists who can act like schmucks. Okay, they ego-trip and want to run the show. Front for the WWP. Fine. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And the average American gives a shit about any of that? Christ, I can't follow that and I know that stuff and a hell of a lot more. Damn if they don't get the port-a-potties there, though. On one of the other threads,there is a great timeline of the sixties. Scrolling down there is a picture of Ramsey Clarke and John Kerry. Well, I supported Kerry, and I would do it again, and I won't knock him. But this past week, it was Ramsey Clarke who was still in the streets. Not to sound too ticked ( but I am), by the logic of the op we should bail on anyone the RW goes after or find candidates so innocuous that we might as well roll over. Sorry. Still a bit grumpy after 350 miles down, a stroll through the streets of DC, and then a drive home.

[LittleClarkie]

57. We have no control over the media or Cindy

there will be no "getting over" her unless she stops or the media becomes less interested in her. As it is they still seek her out.

I don't always agree with everything she says, but she has gotten folk's attention. That said, I am against raising her to icon status. It's not "support Cindy or support the war" just as it's not "support the war or support the terrorists."

I wonder what she's going to do now. Camp Casey was indeed great while the prez was on vacation. But the tour is over. What does she do now. It may be that her greatest impact has come and gone and she will slowly fade out of the news as folks lose interest. That is natural. And I don't think the process needs help nor will we have much impact should we try to keep her in the news artificially. She caught folks imagination down in Camp Casey. She may have already done her duty. We shall what comes now.

[loudsue]

88. Judging from the reaction of the people at the rally, I don't think Cindy

is "done". The people love her. I love her.

She's just begun to fight.


:kick:

[Name removed]

101. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

102. ...

MKJ

[redwitch]

104. I think Cindy Sheehan is an American hero

And I don't care how they spin it.

[High Plains]

105. This is a digusting DU performance

If you disagree with the guy, okay. You don't have to be jerks about it.

[derby378]

106. Remember - the Klan tried to label MLK a "Communist"

It worked with some backwater rednecks, but the rest of America knows better now.

Cindy Sheehan will rise above the smear campaigns, but only if she continues to receive our love and support. She made Nero look like a coward in front of all of America, and that suits me just fine.

[Name removed]

108. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Marleyb]

109. Cindy is the spark that pushed us over the top

We are now in the clear majority. 62% want out of Iraq now.

We do not need to be afraid of the corporate media, they have lost all credibility. That is why they are forced to answer to bloggers, they know more and more people are getting their news from the internet and air america.

We do not need to convince the rest of the rapture right, some of them still think we should be in vietnam.

Of course electronic voting machines are fixing the elections, but we cannot wait until 2006 to end the illegal immoral war anyhow.

The PROBLEM IS THE DEMOCRATIC LEADERS!!!!!

Why are they siding with the rapture right? WTF are they doing? They need to stand together as an opposition party, and that will begin to pull the republicans over as well as it becomes more and more obvious what the will of the people is. They are already getting plenty of public pressure, but since the democrats aren't doing anything why should they. I know this is the democratic underground, but we have to be willing to take a look at our own party and what they are or are not doing.

[txaslftist]

110. Hah. Cindy Sheehan defies the BSM's labelling.

My mom voted straight Republican Ticket until 1996. She went to a Sheehan event in Ohio as an activist.

The trick is to let Cindy know she doesn't need ANSWER or any other flake group to get a protest together. Cindy Sheehan IS momentum.

Let the BSM (bought & sold media) say what they want. If she can motivate my mom, she's alright with me.

[payday06]

114. Cindy lost her son

If she can deal with her loss and pain by becoming political active- more power to her. It is sad that a mother, who has given up her only son for this country, must be dishonored in such a manner by the RW venom squads.

[ChiciB1]

117. Excuuuuussseee Meeeee... I Wasn't Even Going To Respond, But

I'm kind of just fed up with "How Bad The March Was!"

To Begin With, United For Peace & Justice came up with the idea, okay???

And I was there too, and no matter WHAT the media tried to portray, we who were there got a different feel AND view of the whole thing. And for that many people to come together and have such a HUGE March, you have got to believe that many many of us left there with our BATTERIES RE-CHARGED!

Why not try to think that this was a GREAT start.... so many of us there DID NOT KNOW about what C-Span did and I suppose you could say we had our OWN focus! It WAS an Anti-War March and the more others keep what they feel about ANSWER front & center, the more obvious it will become to others who "lurk" here!

I saw this post this morning and decided not to bother with it because I had said much of the same thing at other posts. But right now, it's beginning to upset me. Sorry if others think we sold out, I doubt those of us who were there felt that way! And no, I'm not going to get into a "word war" again! Just putting my 2 cents in AGAIN!

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

119. I'm wondering if the OP is still thinking that we have to...

"move on" from Cindy, after her arrest.

MKJ