More Cindy Sheehan red meat for ya!

[wyldwolf]

Well, the "Sheehan has hit the fan," so to speak. Many here applaud her for interrupting the Democratic press conference. Others feel as I do. But there has been an interesting question raised that I will give my opinion on: Did Sheehan hijack that press event because it was Democrats holding it or because it was the far leftwing's most reviled congressman Rahm Emanuel who was conducting it? My answer is both... and more. She did it because it was a United States Congressman from an American political party representing the United States of America. I don't believe, as some on DU assert, she picked out Emanuel's press conference because he initially backed the Iraq war. If that were the case, she's going to be a very busy girl protesting Democrats and heckling them at other events. At times, she may be required to be in two or more places at one time if her goal is to protest Dems who supported the Iraq war. But I don't think that is the case.

After a very noble and worthwhile beginning, her world has become a place where America is the enemy and it really doesn't matter to her who is running the show here - Republicans or Democrats. Her goal has grown way beyond ending the Iraq war. It has now become altering the very structure of the United States government. Of course, she isn't the mastermind here. She isn't that smart. But she has become the willing pawn of a much larger movement.

Now before you accuse me of falling off the rightwing deep end and using that Republican "Cindy hates America" cliche, humor me for a few minutes. World Can't Wait, a leftwing communist revolutionary organization, has been whispering in her ear for some time now. Last October, they published a top 10 list of Why people shouldn't put their hopes and money into the Democrats, effectively admonishing World Can't Wait supporters (and that includes Sheehan) not to support the Democratic party. It didn't name specific Democrats, but it was specific in who not to support - The Democrats! There is a partial answer to the question - Sheehan was targeting the Democratic party and in doing so, she was targeting America. How so? Read on...

World Can't Wait is truly a snake in the grass organization and it is a shame Sheehan has involved herself with it. One of the group's leaders, C. Clark Kissinger, is involved with the Revolutionary Communist Party, a Maoist vanguard party, and was the national secretary of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), which, in 1969, became the Weather Underground, an organization whose purpose was to "carry out a series of militant actions that would achieve the revolutionary overthrow of the Government of the United States (and of capitalism as a whole)." He was a strong supporter of Iran's Islamic revolution in 1979 and supported Bob Avakian's work to build a real communist party in the U.S.

In August 2005, Kissinger wrote an article titled Getting Real About The Democrats in which he blasted the Democratic party, naming in particular John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid as Democrats not worthy of the left's support. He accused the liberal Reverend Jim Wallace of being the Democrat's "Secretary of Religion" and implied Wallis was being used by Democrats for some ultimate theocratic goal.

Remember - Kissinger works with World Can't Wait. And so does Sheehan.

But if you're a logical person, you're probably thinking this is only guilt by association. What has Cindy personally done that proves she is no friend of the Democratic party and should not be treated as such? For starters, Sheehan threatened to run against Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein in California but instead opted to support the Green Party candidate Todd Chretien in that election. Chretien, a leading member of the International Socialist Organization and frequent contributor to CounterPunch wrote an article in July of 2004 praising those who voted for Ralph Nader in 2000 and declaring that "progressives" shouldn't squander what they started in 2000 by voting for John Kerry in 2004:

Medea Benjamin... and many other liberal and progressive leaders tell us that a Kerry regime "would be less dangerous" than Bush. This may or may not be true... But, even IF Kerry is "less dangerous," he will be MORE capable of wreaking havoc on Iraq, Palestine, Venezuela, abortion, gay rights, civil rights and unions IF we sacrifice our political movement to getting behind him.... Tragically, rather than building on the great start we made in 2000... many of the very same people who helped that effort are trying to wreck it this time around (by) condoning, if not actually leading, a campaign to vilify (Ralph Nader and Peter Camejo) as "Republican dupes"...

THESE are the types of people behind the scenes of the "Sheehan movement."

I could go on about her, delving into some particulary unsavory alegations about her personal character, but I won't. Frankly, one's personal conduct, as long as it is legal, has never been an issue with me. Sheehan has enough political baggage, however, to warrant writing her off.

If you really want to support an anti-war progressive, throw your support behind someone like Dennis Kucinich who actually has a chance in getting something done.

[xultar]

1. ...

:popcorn:

[Tom Joad]

2. Ohhh, red-baiting. How quaint. I bet Fannie Lou Hamer got her share of that too.

[wyldwolf]

20. the accusation of red-baiting is a common self-defense response by Marxist-Leninist types...

..who don't like to be called on their bullshit "Don't vote for Democrats, let's overthrow the government" rhetoric.

[Tom Joad]

31. My god they are every where. Commies, commies! ahhhhhh

[manic expression]

38. I doubt

there are many Marxist-Leninists on this board, much less in the Democratic Party (the same goes for Trotskyists and Maoists, too). I suspect that the people who do claim "red baiting" are, in fact, not actually what you think they are. In all honesty, that's my hunch.

People who support revolutionary change aren't exactly too numerous in the Democratic ranks. Maybe in the anti-war movement, but that's because (thankfully) many ideologies are against the war, not just Democrats or liberals.

[Radical Activist]

106. So anyone who says you're redbaiting must be a communist?

What a bunch of bullshit.

[Tom Joad]

132. It was also a commonly used attack on those who wanted to end the vietnam war,

who wanted fair Party Conventions, the right to vote, the 40 hour work week...

[Morgana LaFey]

It's a new low for him

tho should've been expected any day now, I suppose.

[wyldwolf]

94. damn those facts! Low Low Low!

[happydreams]

125. Nice reply Mr. Joad. You are dead on.

It is an obvious smear campaign.

[MADem]

3. Well written, well argued, and right on the money.

I agree with you completely and I do feel for you. If you catch half the crap I caught yesterday for suggesting that, while Cindy's goal of ending the war was admirable, her methods stunk, you'll need an asbestos suit and a ballistic shield to survive the day!

Good luck!

[ellisonz]

95. Seconded.

Long live democracy and the Democratic Party!

[AZBlue]

4. Excellent post! Thank you!!

K&R

[Cameron27]

5. Damnation......

Thanks for the info!

[jarnocan]

32. I sat with Cindy and others watching the election results, CHEERRING for the demsING

I think they want to keep the pressure (and hence actually the support) for them to follow through, to work for peace, ACCOUNTABILITY, our rights and our democracy. At least that's what I want:)


oh bad Cindy- some people think you have no right to smile (not on DU-but I have heard some freeper types act like she, and others who CARE, have NO RIGHT to ever smile or have a good time)

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

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

[bushclipper]

7. To donate to the Democratic Party...

You can go to this website: http://www.dnc.org

[Cameron27]

9. Thanks

[MADem]

12. Now that makes sense. We need to get rolling for 08...NT

[TayTay]

14. Thanks! I have donated to both!

This is not mutually exclusive.

I don't endorse all that the Dems say. I don't endorse all that World Can't Wait says. But I agree with huge portions of both.

[ellisonz]

96. And...

https://contribute.democracyforamerica.com/

Jim Dean > Howard Dean ....kidding.

[rodeodance]

8. Thanks

[NYCGirl]

10. Here's my favorite sentence in their FAQ: "Look, go ahead and vote if you think you must. "

http://worldcantwait.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2160&Itemid=2

[wyldwolf]

16. ..in other words...

...vote if you think you must or be a part of our overthrow of the government.

[manic expression]

39. One more thing

Are you saying that people with revolutionary beliefs should not be allowed to be a part of the anti-war movement? Or are you saying that you just disagree with them?

[ellisonz]

98. I think he's saying...

They shouldn't be muddying the damn waters of the 110th Congress.

We all want revolution...we're all against the war.

[manic expression]

101. Understood

but when I say "revolutionary beliefs", I mean something vastly different from ending the war in Iraq, I'm referring to a fundamental change in the economic system, and naturally the governmental structure, of the US.

I wish Democrats wouldn't reject people who do have revolutionary beliefs, since they are anti-war and they are a part of that movement.

[ellisonz]

108. I've read Che too...

And I think Che would have loved http://financialservices.house.gov/pr01032007b.html

There is a revolution happening in the house. Don't let the rhetoric overwhelm the message...

[manic expression]

115. Well, Che is a good start

Marx, Lenin, Luxembourg, Trotsky and others are more influential writers than Che. However, Che was a doer, someone who acted first and talked second.

At any rate, I hope there is something afoot, we'll have to see what happens.

[jarnocan]

37. THANKYOU :) John Conyers signed the CALL BTW!!!! and COL.Ann Wright abd

and many others (including me), that many of US respect.

[rinsd]

46. Yes ask the front group what their position is.

"They are an interesting group. I don't agree with everything they say, but I agree with a lot of it. Red-baiting and other silliness aside, I recommend a read on what they actually believe. It's good food for thought."

Its a front group for the RCP who saw the success the WWP had with the IAC and ANSWER and decided to get in on the action.

[dailykoff]

47. Their position is against the war.

And if Marxists are in the vanguard of this critically important movement it wouldn't be the first time.

:)

[rinsd]

50. Its hijacking of a sentiment to rally supporters and funding.

"Marxists are in the vanguard of this critically important movement it wouldn't be the first time."

Marxists (in terms of leadership) tend to exploit any dissatisfaction within a non-Marxist society.

However when Marxist-type governments have issues, those problems are blamed on outside forces.

Hmmmm that shit does sound familiar doesn't it?

[dailykoff]

117. Yes, very familiar. It's straight from 1954. (n/t)

[Der Blaue Engel]

51. I was under the impression they were not fans of John Kerry

I marched with them last year, but later felt uneasy about supporting them, for all of the reasons mentioned in the OP.

:shrug:

[Freddie Stubbs]

90. They don't like the Democratic Party, It's nothing personal with Kerry

[Der Blaue Engel]

111. Right. I'm just surprised, because TayTay is such a Kerry supporter.

I'm wondering if I'm missing something. :shrug:

[Freddie Stubbs]

88. Why should we donate to a group which is actively working against

the Democratic party?

[Lars39]

11. Hit piece attempt to discredit the upcoming march.

[burythehatchet]

13. McCarthy was a cross-dresser ya know.

not that there's anything wrong with it...

[Psephos]

15. Guess you're not running for class president, are you? :-)

Without meaning to insult her, I believe she's naive and an easy target for political opportunists to manipulate for their own ends. Her message and purpose started out fresh and strong, but like Galloway, she has not worn well. Like him, she has become a caricature of herself, and a liability for us.

Peace.

[wyldwolf]

17. LOL! No. And you're reply is exactly correct.

[Hoosier Dem]

18. Very-well said!

I got flack yesterday for saying that Cindy was falling in love with her own celebrity. I also mused that I thought her advisors were hijacking her original mission. Now that you've xposed her "advisors", I have to say I agree 100%.

I was bashed for even suggesting that "Saint Cindy" was not some total innocent. Usually, criticism of me included the phrase "her son DIED". (Gee, I think I know this.) My point was that her original mission was noble and said a lot. She put a face to the now 3,000 grieving families. Now, however, shes lost sight of her original mission and its become more about Cindy and "America is bad".

Sorry, but I've lost respect for Cindy. For me, the real symbols of the anti-war movement are people like Tammy Duckworth, Jack Murtha, and Dennis Kucinich. No, they didn't lose a child to combat (Tammy did lose her legs), but they've remained focused on the problem: this war is a disaster and we need to end it.

[mopinko]

19. nice smear job. just what i expect from wyldwolf

red baiting, wow. what a blast from the past.
i think we need to get pushing skinner, et al for an unrecommend button.

[wyldwolf]

22. where's the smear? Is there something not true in what I wrote?

[Kat 333]

134. There is no smear.

Interesting reading and info. Thank you for posting it.

[Hoosier Dem]

49. Where is the smear??????

Look, just because some us here have been dsheartened by the way Cindy has gone from a grieving mom who we could all support to some sad caricature does not make us Freepers.

I finally started to tune Cindy out earlier this year when she talked about running against Diane Feinstein for Senate. At that, it became "OK, she's now officially a media whore ala Ralph Nader."

Now, I would opine that Cindy is HURTING the anti-war cause more than she is helping it.

And, to save some of you psoting time: YES, I KNOW HER SON DIED IN THE WAR!!!!! No mother should ever have to bury a child and my heart goes out to her for her son. As for her new clique, i find them questionable at best.

[NoPasaran]

21. I thought what Cindy Sheehan did in 2005 was great

Her encampment at Crawford probably did more to galvanize and legitimize the antiwar movement than any other event. And the way Bush reacted to it was a disaster for him. That, followed by the Katrina catastrophe immediately following set the administration on a popularity decline from which it has never recovered.

But unfortunately for Cindy Sheehan, her day has past. Whether she's naive or really is a left-wing co-believer, I cannot say. But in associating with groups like WCW and hugging the bonapartist strongman Hugo Chavez she is squandering the huge moral capital she earned a couple of summers ago and is being reduced to a noisy crank.

[ellisonz]

100. Bingo

:donut:

[yodermon]

23. Aww, a hit piece on Cindy Sheehan, how cuute.

Sorry she's such a scary scary monster. Here, this is for you:

[xiamiam]

24. dont you have anything better to do with your time?...nt

[mike_c]

25. sorry, smearing the left isn't going to win you any points....

I fully support World Can't Wait. I fully support Cindy Sheehan. And I fully agree that "America is the problem" or however you put it in the OP. Smear them all you like-- it won't make a whit of difference to me.

[wyldwolf]

26. Hmmm... I seem to have won 10 points already...

[SaveElmer]

27. I don't know how many times I have been told here...

That telling the truth about someone's record is not "smearing"

Wyldwolf is simply telling the truth...

[rsmith6621]

28. Cindy....Just Go Home.....

....And complain to your Senator Boxer and Fienstien....if they wont help you out with your agenda then why would you expect anyone elses Senator/CM to..

[jarnocan]

40. freeper speak?......... THANKYOU to Cindy and all the others that STAND UP for

US! sounds like it, I am very happy and grateful that there are people who are doing all they can to promote peace and justice! I do what I can but usually do not have the means to be with them.

The reason I said freeper speak, usually it is freeper types that think people should not have the right to protest, they tend to think activism is un-American, silly folk:)

[rsmith6621]

44. She has Had Her Protest....

.....it not working!!!!...not one(politicians) is listening to her except Randi Rhodes....she needs to lay back for awhile and figure out a away to be heard without being arrested which is ruining her credibility with the public.

[jarnocan]

140. I don't think she needs to take your advice. Jan. 27th? also it

isn't just her, there are other Goldstar Family for Peace members,Code Pink, Vets for peace, and many others who care
http://www.grannypeacebrigade.org/coming_events.html#calltoactioncoming_events.htmlcoming_events.htmlcoming_events.htmlcoming_events.html Do the Grannies have to shut up too? I don't think so.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/ videos of events and more info.
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/january27 Events sponsered by progressive Dems and many others.

[John Q. Citizen]

158. Yeah, Martin Luther King had that same "arrest" problem. Totally ruined him..

[Reterr]

159. I wish I had the kind of confidence in the future and

whats "working" and whats not and what people are thinking and what people don't support etc. etc. that you people do.

Thats such an O'Reillyesque tone "Look xyz is not working..pack your bags..Do this..do that...Its runing her credibility with the public".

Do you people ever doubt yourselves at all :shrug:? You say these things with such absolute confidence.

[enough already]

166. Yeah, we need to muzzle her now that she's holding OUR feet to the fire on the war

Free speech is just too damned inconvenient. </sarcasm>

[k_jerome]

29. very informative post. thank you. recommended. nt

[jarnocan]

30. I think Cindy Sheehan and Col. Ann Wright are wonderful and (pics)

sincere. Former diplomat Ann Wright spoke at a World Can't wait Rally in NY, first time I saw her. I may not agree fully with everything Cindy says, but she is a warm, compassionate and very caring person.
We do not all have to agree on everything, for the common good. Many of us are concerned that ACCOUNTABILITY seems to be 'off the table'.



I think their (and the other code pinks VETS, and Gold Fams for peace ETC.) contributions to the anti-war movement are tremendous. I also respect and appreciate Dennis Kucinich's efforts too.

[Lars39]

33. Well looky there!

Those must be the "radical elements" a mod was referring to in another thread.

Thanks for posting these.

[NoSheep]

113. I suppose it is too radical to care about other's lives to the point that you

risk your own WITHOUT being brainwashed by Big Brother. Thank you for your post. I still stand with Cindy.

[jarnocan]

141. thanks (sorry for the typo-rushing back to work)

[noamnety]

34. Neoliberalism primer.

Neoliberalism generally favours multilateral political pressure through international organizations or treaty devices such as the WTO, the World Bank and the African Development Bank. It promotes reducing the role of national governments to a minimum. Neoliberalism favours privatization over direct government intervention and production (such as Keynesianism), and measures success in overall economic gain. To improve efficiency and minimize unemployment, it strives to reject or mitigate labour policies such as minimum wage, and collective bargaining rights. It opposes socialism, protectionism, environmentalism, fair trade, and critics say it impedes democratic rule. Likewise, these critics argue that labour rights and social justice should have a priority in international relations and economics.

(snip)

... the term is most commonly applied to moderate Democrats like the Democratic Leadership Council.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism

[wyldwolf]

36. ...don't forget the other characteristics...

...usually for voting and the Democratic process. Doesn't advocate armed revolt against the government... unlike the groups Cindy is keeping company with.

[noamnety]

66. You mean these folks?

Harry Belafonte
US Rep. John Conyers Jr.
Bob Bossie (SCJ, 8th Day Center for Justice)
Daniel Ellsberg
Rev. Jesse L. Jackson
Rickie Lee Jones
Ray McGovern
Jed Stone (Past president of Illinois Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers)
Gore Vidal
Thom Hartmann (Talk Radio/Author)
Esther Kaplan (Author: With God On Their Side)
Mark Crispin Miller (Author, Performer)
Camilo Mejia, Conscientious Objector
Harold Pinter, Nobel Laureate playwright
Juan Torres, Gold Star Family Member
Naomi Wallace, playwright
Alice Walker
Howard Zinn

http://worldcantwait.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2538&Itemid=2#endorsers
:eyes:

The fearmongering here is impressive. I'm sure Rickie Lee Jones is right around the corner from you - right now - with her machine gun, just on the verge of overthrowing America.

[John Q. Citizen]

160. Yeah, too hell with Tomas Jefferson! And with the new voting machines, the

Mega Corporate Media (Thanks for the telecomunications act, Bill. Made my life wonderful..) to help us decide, and the big corporate money to pay for ads in that media we are all so free, it's like a freedom orgasm all over the world!

[NoPasaran]

41. That "primer" comes with a couple of caveats

This article or section does not cite its references or sources.
Please help improve this article by introducing appropriate citations. (help, get involved!)
This article has been tagged since July 2006.

This article or section may contain original research or unverified claims.
Please help Wikipedia by adding references. See the talk page for details

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism

[noamnety]

56. Here are some other sources

http://www.monthlyreview.org/301rwm.htm
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=376
http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/FreeTrade/Neoliberalism.asp

[rinsd]

43. Primer? That's an unsourced ideological rant.

And if you can show me where the DLC has opposed minumum wage or gone after unions, I'd like to see it.

[noamnety]

58. The DLC and the WTO.

This article - from the DLC - says:

The trade agreement signed by the United States and China is a good deal that would create new opportunities for U.S. business and workers. It was signed only after China made an enormous series of concessions opening its markets to U.S. goods, services, and investment in exchange for admission to the World Trade Organization (WTO). The agreement represents the culmination of 13 years of negotiations over opening up the Chinese economy.

As President Clinton often notes, we have 4 percent of the world's population and 22 percent of the world's wealth. To sustain this advantage, we have to find new ways to sell our goods and services to the other 96 percent of the world's population. China, with more than a billion people and a growing middle class hungry for our products, just can't be ignored.

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=108&subid=128&contentid=703

Note the presumption here that 4 percent of the population MUST retain 22 percent of the world's wealth.

I believe that's one of the points that many people feel is not consistent with social justice.

Continuing on, in their own words:

The deal has rightly drawn praise from the business community, from farmers, and from the international community. It is also drawing protests from the political right and left. But these objections are based mainly on non-trade-related concerns about China's human rights record and its strategic aims in the Pacific and elsewhere, not on the value of the deal itself to business and workers.

They were able to force "an enormous series of concessions" from China in order to trade with them, but the DLC is saying human rights issues were not among those concessions, not a concern at all, were not "relevent" to how we do business, so long as we continue to make money, to ensure that the 4% continues to own 22% of the wealth in the world.

Is that consistent with your beliefs? Do you think a small percentage of the world's population OUGHT to own as much of the wealth as possible? If so, you may be a neoliberal.

[rinsd]

64. You didn't answer my question.

"They were able to force "an enormous series of concessions" from China in order to trade with them, but the DLC is saying human rights issues were not among those concessions, not a concern at all, were not "relevent" to how we do business, so long as we continue to make money, to ensure that the 4% continues to own 22% of the wealth in the world"

It does not say irrelevant it is speaking about whether the concerns were trade related.

Has China done better/worse/same on human rights since they have entered the WTO?

Does the membership in the WTO give greater importance to human rights for fera of being ousted?

And the biggest laugher? Those who are most likely to use a term like neoliberal were fine and dandy with China's human right record before they began adopting capitalist reforms.

[noamnety]

127. Here you go.

"Even the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), the "New Democrat" organization once led by the President, declared that "the minimum wage can be allowed to fade into history."

http://www.sbsc.org/content/display.cfm?ID=792

"The DLC has had a rocky history with unions stretching back to the 1994 battle over the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which labor opposed and the DLC strenuously backed.
The DLC again angered labor this year with its support of the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) and its praise for Democrats who supported the trade pact."

http://thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/111005/unions.html

[ellisonz]

102. It's all about the sourcing...

This article or section does not cite its references or sources.
Please help improve this article by introducing appropriate citations. (help, get involved!)
This article has been tagged since July 2006.

This article or section may contain original research or unverified claims.
Please help Wikipedia by adding references. See the talk page for details.

I think we should start calling this the wikifallacy...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism_%28international_relations%29

This is a much stronger article. In particular,

Keohane and Nye
Robert O. Keohane and Joseph S. Nye, in response to neorealism, develop an opposing theory they dub "Complex Interdependence". Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye explain, “…complex interdependence sometime comes closer to reality than does realism.” <3> In explaining this, Keohane and Nye cover the three assumptions in realist thought: First, states are coherent units and are the dominant actors in international relations; second, force is a useable and effective instrument of policy; and finally, the assumption that there is a hierarchy in international politics. <4>

The heart of Keohane and Nye’s argument is that in international politics there are, in fact, multiple channels that connect societies exceeding the conventional Westphalian system of states. This manifests itself in many forms ranging from informal governmental ties to multinational corporations and organizations. Here they define their terminology; interstate relations are those channels assumed by realists; transgovernmental relations occur when one relaxes the realist assumption that states act coherently as units; transnational applies when one removes the assumption that states act coherently. It is through these channels that political exchange occurs, not through the limited interstate channel as championed by realists.

Secondly, Keohane and Nye argue that there is not, in fact, a hierarchy among issues, meaning that not only is the martial arm of foreign policy not the supreme tool by which to carry out a states agenda, but that there are a multitude of different agendas that come to the forefront. The line between domestic and foreign policy becomes blurred in this case, as realistically there is no clear agenda in interstate relations.
Finally, the use of military force is not exercised when complex interdependence prevails. The idea is developed that between countries in which a complex interdependence exists, the role of the military in resolving disputes is negated. However, Keohane and Nye go on to state that the role of the military is in fact important to that "alliance’s political and military relations with a rival bloc."

[happydreams]

119. Nice work on Neoliberalism. They have taken over both parties.

[dailykoff]

35. Red meat for red states.

Where's the beef? And since when is Counterpunch your featured source?

:shrug:

[manic expression]

42. You're missing what's important

WCW and RCP are connected to an extent, that's not in dispute.

However, WCW is doing a lot for the anti-war movement, something you can't say for some of the Democrats in power (the ones Cindy is critical of) who voted for the war, and then ran their election campaigns on its failure. Are you really blaming Cindy for not putting all her trust in people who have, up until this points, not presented a significant amount of opposition to the war? And to people who claim that they oppose it, you may be right if you listen to what they say, but the fact is that the funding bills keep getting passed.

This may be news to some, but Democrats aren't the only ones in this country that oppose imperialist wars, and instead of trying to exorcise them, Democrats should embrace them. Don't reject people who want to contribute to our cause, that's just counterproductive.

[Cameron27]

53. Democrats should embrace

an organization that's advocating NOT voting for Democrats?

No thanks.

[manic expression]

67. An organization that is anti-war

If you're going to nit-pick over who you're going to let into your anti-war club, you're only hurting your own cause.

[Luminous Animal]

45. Cindy Sheehan hates America

and so these folks:

911Truth.org;
James Abourezk;
AfterDowningStreet.org;
DAWN (DC Anti-War Network);
Democracy Rising;
Green Party USA;
Bill Goodman, Center for Constitutional Rights*;
ImpeachBush.org; ImpeachForPeace.org;
ImpeachBush.tv;
Lucinda Marshall, Feminists for Peace;
Cynthia McKinney;
National Lawyers Guild;
United for Lt. Watada;
Gore Vidal;
Rev. Lennox Yearwood, Hip Hop Caucus

All endorsers or the January 4th World Can't Wait protest.

[Tom Joad]

48. Might as well ban most of DU, too.

[ellisonz]

103. Green Party USA

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Presidential_Election

They got us into this mess, and they certainly aren't going to get us out.

My money is with Nancy, Harry and Howard.

[Tom Joad]

131. Yes,, all those Green Party Senators lined up to vote for the IWR.

While the Dems did everything to stop it.

I read it, that is what big brother said. Really.

[ellisonz]

139. Say what you want...

but don't throw me in w/Kerry and Edwards...I was a Deaniac from July 2003 on. Howard Dean is now DNC Chair. Don't blame the whole party for the sins of a faction...

It is revisionist history to not acknowledge that Nader prevented Gore from defeating Bush. The Bushies may have done alot to steal it, but Nader gave them the chance to succeed. I'm sorry, it's the truth, deal with it.

O8)

[Tom Joad]

152. My point was that Nader did not vote for that resolution any more than you did.

Why not blame Bush voters for the votes bush got. Why not blame people who didn't vote. Why not blame Katherine Harris. Don't blame Nader and greens.

Perhaps you want the new congress should make a law that limits access to the ballot. Or abolishes elections altogether, so greens won't cause any more problems.

[manic expression]

52. First they came for Cindy Sheehan......n/t

[Name removed]

54. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[midnight]

153. Simple but perfect statement.

Cindy has my support. Bring them Home.

[LittleClarkie]

55. I'm not thrilled with the woman's tactics, but this is a smear piece

and reminds me of what people tried to do to Kerry based on the associations he'd had with the VVAW.

[SaveElmer]

57. Can you point to any factual errors in the piece....

How many times have I been told that telling the truth about someons record is not smearing...

[noamnety]

59. Ah, it's a smear piece.

Some clues:

Linking her name with "shit" - kinda like CNN connecting Osama with Obama.
Calling her a "girl"
Stating her world has become a place where America is the enemy (is that a "fact"?)
"She isn't that smart"
I'm not saying Cindy Hates America, but ... (Been listening to Fox lately?)
Hinting at "unsavory allegations about her personal character" while stating that you won't go there ... I dunno, maybe you've been working at Fox, not just listening to them.

I don't have a problem with you stating she's not a blind supporter of Democrats, that's true and nobody that knows her would debate that. But if you can't recognize the editorializing and smear in your own writing (edit/correction: someone's writing) and you think this is composed entirely of "facts," maybe it's time to pick up a new hobby.

[SaveElmer]

60. Uh...I didn't write it...

And do you dispute the facts as laid out...?-

[noamnety]

61. My mistake.

lost track of the reply sequence in the thread.

However, you should still be able to recognize the smear and editorializing. "Telling the truth about someone's record" means listing facts, not 5% facts, 95% smear.

[SaveElmer]

62. Well if anything I'd reverse that...

The piece is wholly accurate...

Smear implies telling something inaccuarate about someone you know to be false...not the case here..

Wyldwolf made clear his feelings about Cindy Sheehan, but did not falsely characterize her associations.

[Solon]

65. Wolf implied that Cindy is dumb and a communist...

Seriously, if you can't see this as a smear piece, there is no help for you.

[noamnety]

70. Didn't falsely characterize her associations?

By implying something sinister about her because she belongs to an organization with Howard Zinn, a former US senator, and Gore Vidal on the Advisory Board?

Don't you have some duct tape you ought to be buying?

[wyldwolf]

68. Right... sure...

Linking her name with "shit" - kinda like CNN connecting Osama with Obama.

No, what CNN did was a mistake. There is no connection between Obama and Osama. There IS very close connections between Sheehan and "shit."

Calling her a "girl"

That is a smear? Calling someone a "busy girl" or "busy boy" is figure of speech. See the Huffington Post quoting The Guardian calling Howard Dean a "busy boy."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2006/11/11/labour-party-recruits-how_n_33892.html

..and Firedoglake calling Patrick Fitzgerald a "busy boy."

http://firedoglake.blogspot.com/2005/12/patrick-fitzgerald-is-busy-boy.html

Stating her world has become a place where America is the enemy (is that a "fact"?)

In fact, it has been. You're known by the company you keep.

"She isn't that smart"

She isn't. World Can't Wait and others have spent years getting where they are. Are we to believe Cindy Sheehan did this all in a few short years? LOL!

Your "it's a smear piece" is designed to detract from the fact Sheehan has become the puppet of radical groups.

[PassingFair]

151. ...and NANCY PELOSI marches with NAMBLA!

PLEASE take your red-baiting SMEARS back to the
fetid swamp of Will Marshall's atrophied brain
from whence they must have arisen.

I was once PHOTOGRAPHED next to an ANSWER poster at
a rally! DEPORT ME!

DLC spinning to marginalize Sheehan, and,
I'm sure, Code Pink, et. al to protect the unrepentant
YES voting enablers in the house and senate are SO transparent,
....well, I DON'T need a candle!

Cindy "interrupted" the conference on the day before
congress was seated. What better time was there?
There were no interruptions on Thursday.

[LittleClarkie]

69. I consider it a smear to play the guilt by association game

And also to play the "dust off the old quote and pretend it's still relevant" game like they did with Kerry when he said something about the UN in 1972 and the Right tried to pretend that it was how he felt now. Or by truthfully saying that Kerry was featured in a book with an upside down flag on the cover, but neglecting to say that an upside down flag is a distress signal in the Navy, and not an UnAmerican symbol.

Hence true statements strung together in such a way to imply guilt can be a smear. Or a possible smear. I'd have to check out each association of Mr. Kissinger and other mentioned to see what their true intentions were at each step. The associations by themselves may be damning for Mr. Wyldwolf. It's not good enough for me.

[noamnety]

73. Before you get too caught up in Mr. Kissinger's bio

I suggest looking at who actually runs the world can't wait, because he's not even on the steering committee of the advisory board.

Howard Zinn, on the other hand, is.

http://worldcantwait.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=0&Itemid=2#brower

I went to a college where, after I graduated, a student went on a shooting rampage. I guess that "shows the kind of people I associate with" by the OP's logic.

[wyldwolf]

76. then I suggest you check WHOIS and see who owns their website

Domain ID:D106537144-LROR
Domain Name:WORLDCANTWAIT.ORG
Created On:06-Jun-2005 14:12:07 UTC
Last Updated On:01-Jan-2006 15:32:07 UTC
Expiration Date:06-Jun-2008 14:12:07 UTC
Sponsoring Registrar:Tucows Inc. (R11-LROR)
Status:OK
Registrant ID:tu5dLPCfXNvOyMlS
Registrant Name:C. Clark Kissinger
Registrant Organization:C. Clark Kissinger

[LittleClarkie]

77. Thank your for that information

Like I said, a smear.

[wyldwolf]

78. Ahem...

Domain ID :D106537144-LROR
Domain Name:WORLDCANTWAIT.ORG
Created On:06-Jun-2005 14:12:07 UTC
Last Updated On:01-Jan-2006 15:32:07 UTC
Expiration Date:06-Jun-2008 14:12:07 UTC
Sponsoring Registrar:Tucows Inc. (R11-LROR)
Status:OK
Registrant ID:tu5dLPCfXNvOyMlS
Registrant Name:C. Clark Kissinger
Registrant Organization:C. Clark Kissinger

[rinsd]

71. I would tend to agree though I have my reservations

Outright substituting this group for Sheehan is a bit out of bounds but something tells me the OP isn't that far off the mark.

After all this was a self professed Republican who voted for Bush in 2000 and a year after she began her quest for answers, she's on stage with Chavez and writing about the evils of capitalism.

[LittleClarkie]

72. I thought she was supposed to be a professed Dem

Okay, I'm confused.

[noamnety]

74. She's not a "my party right or wrong" dem, if she is one.

People are acting all outraged suddenly that she's criticizing democrats, but she's been doing that for at least well over a year. I don't understand what the sudden shock is about.

Cindy Sheehan Takes on the Democrats, Hillary Clinton: Sep 2005. http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0538,lombardiweb,68015,2.html

[LittleClarkie]

75. Just wondering at party affiliation as people have said she was both

now I'm wondering what the truth is.

[rinsd]

79. You know what this is weird. I went to check my memory vs. sourcing

I see her quoted as saying she's a Democrat but her husband was Republican. Which took me back because I was under the impression that she was a Republican who had turned on Bush.

But I also see her state she voted for Bush twice(not just once as I had thought)?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/1/9/165527/5738

[NYCGirl]

80. In the KOS diary Sheehan is quoting an email from a friend — who voted for

Bush twice. It's a bit hard to read, but I think that's it.

[rinsd]

81. Now I am even more confused

Though thank you for pointing that out.

I have been under the apparently erroneous perception that Sheehan was a Republican who had turned against the war.

[Cameron27]

82. I'm getting confused too,

I hope the mods let this thread stay alive until this WCW association is clarified.

[ProudDad]

155. Not surprising

from this OP....

[Name removed]

63. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[manic expression]

83. If anyone is wondering about the criteria for these claims

It's all right here in an easy-to-watch video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BonLVVt10a4

[wyldwolf]

84. the criteria? I would say the criteria is, first and foremost, that it be factual.

Which it is.

[manic expression]

85. The video's pretty factual too, right? n/t

[wyldwolf]

86. Why not tell us what isn't factual in the OP?

[manic expression]

87. I have in other posts

but I think the video might be helpful in identifying Cindy Sheehan for the red that she is, much like the OP.

[wyldwolf]

89. no you haven't

Show one post where you identified something that wasn't factual in the OP.

[manic expression]

91. I've addressed your conclusions

which is, in essence, guilt by assocation. Sheehan has nothing to do with the RCP, except being part of a group that is associated with RCP.

You have nothing but guilt by association.

[wyldwolf]

92. you've tried to rationalize them away.

Sheehan gets her talking points from a group who shares a common goal, history, and key figure with RCP.

[Name removed]

93. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Eric J in MN]

138. We know the communists are the Bad Guys because they don't use warrants...

...in that video.

Imagine if this country was in the grips of people who don't believe in warrants.

[fuzzyball]

97. Best post of the week....eom

[wyldwolf]

99. Thank you! It's now in the second tier of the Greatest Page...

...keep those recommends coming!

[xiamiam]

104. i cant imagine WHY this is on the greatest page...this is garbage...nt

[wyldwolf]

105. Thanks, DU! For making this the 9th most popular thread! Top 10, baby!

[Radical Activist]

107. Oh no, that poor stupid woman can't think for herself! She's a tool!

That's what you seem to be saying. I think you're way off.

Rahm Emanuel was a logical choice. As a leading pro-war Democrat who has been vocal about rejecting the true message of the last election, he is the one who needed to be confronted most of all. Why not just give her credit for bringing attention to anti-war issues in a way that few others have, including Dennis Kucinich?

Issue activists are loyal to their issue, not any party. That's no reason to insult her.

[NoSheep]

114. lol! Why Do you hate America?

:7

[Leftist78]

109. so basically...

you're saying that someone who associates with an organization (justifiably) critical of Democrats is unforgivable even when that organization is correct about almost every issue.

Walking lockstep behind every person with a D beside their name is not what thinking progressives do. Would you have us behave like the wingnuts and diligently support anyone the party leadership says we should?

I contend, and I believe this is Cindy's basic contention as well, is that it's no good to elect leaders if you don't then hold them accountable for real change. So far, I'd say that the new Democratic majority has shown very little backbone. Taking impeachment off the table, refusing to cut funding for the war (or at the very least threaten it), no talk about fair-trade reform, a small minimum wage increase that will in all likelihood be tied to some economic windfall for the wealthy. These are not examples of progressive views being advanced. We should be holding their feet to the fire, because if we don't, they'll continue to walk that DLC centrist line.

Personally, I don't give a damn who's behind Cindy, if they stand for the right kind of change in America as WCW seems to, I support them.

As for the ties with RCP, I don't think that makes the goals of the organization any less admirable. MLK received a lot of help from Communists, but he was right and they were right to support him. You don't have to agree with 100% of a groups aims in order to join with them on issues that matter.

[MasonJar]

110. I seem to remember that Cindy is fighting to stop the Iraq War &

striving to bring the young men and women home and to stop the slaughter of innocent Iraqis. This is not a party issue. She, therefore, is under no obligation to any party, including ours. I am sure she favors us over the Pugs and Bush, but that does not mean that she should or will step down from criticizing warmongers of any stripe. Cindy is almost assuredly a person of great depth and conscience and a patriot who yearns for peace. She also has the committment to put herself on the line to stop the murderers of her son, and that is what Bush and company are, murderers.

[welshTerrier2]

112. my good friend Mr. Wolf

truly your post is a curiousity ... let's explore some of the specifics together, shall we?

first, before getting into a point-by-point discussion, let me talk a little about my own views and ask you whether you would "lump me in with your criticisms of Sheehan" ... I attended a World Can't Wait anti-war demonstration last fall ... it had some fantastic speakers from many different political philosophies ... most spoke about the lies told by bush that led up to the invasion of Iraq ... the focus was on those with power and NOT on the Democratic Party ... yes, there actually was one speaker who spoke against the ravages of capitalism ... big deal ... is that by definition anti-American? not for me it isn't ...

I spoke, and vehemently argued, with WCW members that I disagreed with their dismissal of electoral politics ... yes, they see no benefit whatsoever to supporting Democrats ... i'm probably best labeled, if i must be labeled, some form of socialist ... we need not argue about which system is best here ... does that make me "anti-American"?? It's a very dangerous business when you get into calling those who want to see radical change in the US as anti-American ... i ask you to be extremely cautious of climbing on this very slippery slope ... i consider myself to be extremely pro-American and extremely opposed to the corruption and greed and "special interests" and abuse that capitalism and big money has had on our country and its institutions ... again, we need not argue the correctness or wrongness of my views; the point is that I want to see an America that honors its founding traditions and I believe our economic systems has prostituted them ... even if I'm completely wrong, does that make me someone who sees America as an enemy? it most certainly is NOT how i see myself ...

and if you agree, and perhaps you don't, why do you then see Sheehan as anti-American? is your argument that those who fight against the status quo, even those who call for revolution, are by definition "anti-American"? is it reasonable to argue that the "status quo" is American and those who want to uproot it are anti-American? perhaps you believe it is ... i do not ... and this statement "Sheehan was targeting the Democratic party and in doing so, she was targeting America." was a bit over the top in my view ... targeting the Democratic Party is un-American? so, if i'm from the Libertarian Party or the Socialist Workers Party or the Green Party or the Constitution Party, I'm by definition un-American? hard to follow that logic ...

you wrote a fair amount documenting the agenda of WCW ... is their "overall" agenda Sheehan's agenda? is there good evidence of this? i was happy to have the support of a group that organized a very legitimate anti-war rally ... Did Howard? or Rahm? or Hillary? or even Kucinich for that matter? I truly wish they had! I still wish they would ... i don't see a bunch of excellent speeches and marching in the streets and meeting your neighbors to "get energized" as a negative, far lefty activity ... in fact, i think there is nothing more American than citizens publically expressing their views ... Iraq is obviously and appropriately an issue of great importance and great passion among many Americans ... no, demonstrations are not the only way to speak out on the war - but they are nevertheless a way for "leaders" to take their message to the people and one way for people to be heard ... I heard Howard Zinn speak at one demonstration I attended ... he talked in great detail about the toll this war has taken on innocent human beings ... to paint such activities as "far lefty" is just unjustified name-calling ... i can't remember the guy's name but one of the BU professors who spoke at the WCW anti-war rally I attended was a "high level Democrat" (i believe he said in the Gore 2000 campaign) ... the point is many attended the demonstration and we were NOT MONOLITHIC in our political views ... why ascribe the traits of the organization to Sheehan? ... she is first and foremost a symbol of the anti-war movement and i think most in "the movement" view her as a very positive symbol ... whether she speaks on other issues seems less important right now and she's certainly entitled to her own opinions ...

you've actually addressed one of the concerns i have about your post on your own ... you used the phrase "guilt by association" ... you cited an article not even written by Sheehan by a Green candidate who didn't want people to support Kerry and other Democrats ... quelle shock! what kind of Green candidate would you expect to support the Democratic Party? ... did Sheehan vote for Kerry? i have no idea - your post didn't say ... i vaguely remember some DU posts about a very positive meeting between Sheehan and Kerry ... does anyone else remember this?

let's get to the bottom line on all this ... many of us want the Democrats to put a stop to bush's insane war ... i'm sure it comes as no surprise that there are millions of different views as to how to go about this ... question one is: should we each have the right to attend public forums held by elected government officials and speak out and demonstrate? i did NOT like that the Dems holding the press conference were not permitted to speak but i didn't like that they were unable to hold a dialog with the citizens who were present either ... if you hold a public press conference, i think you should allow the public a right to speak ... frankly, the whole event was unfortunate from both sides ...

question two is: is it fair to say that people who oppose both Democrats and republicans are anti-American? i am a big supporter of one man, one vote ... my view of American capitalism is that money has poisoned our democracy ... perhaps you disagree but does wanting to overthrow a system that caters to monied interests and essentially gives large corporations more power than it gives citizens make me anti-American ... at least be clear that I think things are exactly the opposite of the way you've presented them ... i see the idea of seeking parity for each citizen (i.e. voting parity that is; not economic "levelling") as supremely American ...

that should give you plenty to pick on for now so i'll stop there ...

[MrRobotsHolyOrders]

116. Holy Shit

The weird thing is, I agree with your premise: I think all Cindy Sheehan is doing right now is pissing on the elected officials who have the best hope of supporting her cause. I think it's self defeating, and I wish she'd stop

But then, you go into this weird, 600 word diatribe against World Can't Wait. As anyone who's worked around World Cant Wait can tell you, they're self righteus dorks, but they're harmless. None of them would ever pickup a gun against the government, their member base is small, and if the Democratic party is worried that they have the ability to hurt them in an election cycle, then the Democratic party should be finished anyway. Your whole diatribe is a sham to build up this horrifying leftist army that doesn't exsist, mostly to press home a point that doesn't need the accompanying bullshit to be completely valid.

But seriously, what are the filthy, filthy personal dirt you've got on her? You sound like you've built this thing up fairly large in your mind, and its kinda terrifying.

[dailykoff]

118. Very Nixonion.

"I could go on about her, delving into some particulary unsavory alegations about her personal character, but I won't."

Tricky Dick would be proud. Is Sheehan really such a threat that you have to stoop to red-baiting?

[Hissyspit]

120. There shouldn't be ANY recommendations for this post just because of that line.

Disgusting. I am so sick of this shit, I am going to support Cindy and her tactics just to piss people off who post this stuff.

[wyldwolf]

122. #5 on the Greatest Page! woo hoo!

[happydreams]

124. More evidence that the Democratic Party is in need of serious

shakeup. That is if you believe DU reflects the Democratic Party's "center".

[Hissyspit]

126. Rod Stewart's "Do You Think I'm Sexy?" went to #1.

"Achy Breaky Heart" went to #1. "My Humps" went to #1.

Popuarity does not equal quality.

[Solon]

129. Maybe its a case of, "Hey, Look at STUPID!"...

At least, I hope.

[happydreams]

121. How do you unrecommend a post? I am unable to find the button

for that.

[noamnety]

123. OMG! I just realized the OP says to support KUCINICH!!!

Everyone here needs to be aware that he's associated with Lieberman and Zell Miller!

If you're a logical person, you're probably thinking this is only guilt by association.

What has Kucinich personally done that proves he is no friend of the Democratic party and should not be treated as such? For starters, in 1999, he and 25 other congressional reps SUED President Clinton. It's bad enough some people interrupt democrats when they are speaking, but suing the Democratic president - well, people generally don't sue their friends, do they? And then, he ran against Democratic presidential candidates in the 2004 election. Furthermore, his candidacy was endorsed by the Green Party - the same party that, I don't need to remind people, had the support of Cindy Sheehan.

But WAIT - it gets worse! It turns out that commie Sheehan has closer ties to Kucinich than that.

Breakfast with Dennis Kucinich
by Cindy Sheehan

Little did I know, as Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-Oh) and I were driving through the streets of a Cleveland, Ohio, another American city that looks like it is preparing for the onslaught of a very cold winter on that gray morning, that he would be presenting me with a clear, reasonable, and obvious plan for bringing American troops out what is rapidly becoming total anarchy in Iraq.

The previous evening, Dennis and I, both spoke at the US Labor Against the War conference in Cleveland. During his impassioned speech (not too many people know that Dennis is an inspired orator, and each time I hear him speak, I feel like searching for the nearest baptismal font or river to be baptized for something, anything), Dennis hinted at what would be just the thing to give our troops a one way ticket home from the quicksands of Iraq.
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1207-21.htm

THESE are the types of people behind the scenes of the "Kucinich movement."

I could go on about him, delving into some particulary unsavory alegations about his personal character, but I won't. Frankly, one's personal conduct, as long as it is legal, has never been an issue with me. Kucinich has enough political baggage, however, to warrant writing him off.

-------------------------

Writing fact-based commentary is easier than I thought! :evilgrin:

[Eric J in MN]

137. Very good. NT

NT

[nam78_two]

164. ....

:rofl: :thumbsup:
You know I have read your posts and you sound like communist infiltrator on DU-Go worship your Mao statue now :spank: ;).

[PA Democrat]

128. "I could go on about her, delving into some particulary [sic] unsavory alegations[sic] about her

personal character, but I won't."

Wow! You are a classy guy. Nice sleaze tactic.


Edited to add . I want to make it clear that these are not my misspellings.

[Solon]

130. Joseph McCarthy called, he wants his paranoia back. n/t

[Tom Joad]

133. Yes, this post was a bit illiterate, wasn't it. Like National Enquirer, w/o the spell check.

[Name removed]

135. Deleted message

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

[Eric J in MN]

136. Sheehan ALMOST ran against Diane Feinstein,

...but didn't.

[Selah]

142. You have done extensive research and:

I think you have hit the nail on the head. What did her trip to Venezuala amount to ?

[MelissaB]

143. Many of us here have protested with World Can't Wait without agreeing with everything

they stand for. Some of us even organized for our city. :) Just an fyi...

[femrap]

144. Well, the neocons will be glad to see this

disagreement over Cindy Sheehan among the Democratic ranks....nothing like a little bit of Divide & Conquer. Karl would be ever so proud.

Instead of tearing down someone who is working to stop the war, why not take that energy and use it against the neocons instead?

There are a lot of Democrats/Progressives/Lefties who are no fans of the DLC-type of Democrats...they're Republican Lite...like Rahm.

I can work with all Dems...there's a big tent. Why can't you accept that there are folks to your Left who want to see more of an economic overhaul of this Corporately dominated system of capitalism?

Cindy isn't hurting the Dems....I'm sure Rahm could handle the Dissent. He's a big boy.

Personally I think there is something going on here much more primal...boys don't like mom upsetting the apple cart and pushing her weight around...therefore, they ridicule of her. I don't think Cindy cares...she's doing what she has to do.

Edited to add: Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way.

[LostInAnomie]

145. What exactly is the point of this piece?

Even though I disagree with Cindy Sheehan's methods, her goals seem to be fairly cut and dry. She is against the war, with fairly good reason. I have never heard her advocate a social revolution or communist agenda. All this piece really seems to do is try to form a guilt by association basis for not liking Cindy Sheehan.

It seems pretty damn underhanded to me.

[piesRsquare]

146. I was cheering Cindy Sheehan on

when she parked herself at the "ranch" in Crawford.

Nowadays, I have little to no respect for her, for the same reasons that other posters have stated. It also pisses me off that SHE decided that I (and everyone else) wasn't going to hear what Rahm had to say; I wanted to hear it!

I want the war to end, but Cindy Sheehan definitely DOES NOT speak for me.

Casey Sheehan truly believed he was serving his country at the highest level, and he did his job proudly. He loved this country to the extent that he was willing to fight and die for it. Casey's death was tragic and untimely, yet nothing short of honorable. His mother now dishonors him by exploiting his death for her own personal gratification and purpose.

In his name, Cindy Sheehan publicly embraces those who are associated with enemies of the very country her son was willing to fight and die for (and did). In his name, she hijacked the press conference of the Congress that could end this war, abusing her right to free speech by shouting down an elected official and disallowing the rest of us from hearing what he had to say. Cindy Sheehan spits on her son's grave with such actions; it's shameful and embarassing!

What did Casey Sheehan die for? Well, he didn't die for Chavez, Marxism, Socialism, or for overthrow of the US government, that's for sure!

[azureblue]

147. Yep a smear piece- poor at that

That wouldn't make it out of Journo 101. You state this: "World Can't Wait, a leftwing communist revolutionary organization, has been whispering in her ear for some time now." And run with it as fact, using guilt by association as your smear tactic. Then you use the defense of "prove it is not fact" without proving this assertion, to defend your post. You made an unproven and purposely nebulous accusation, flung the old "Commie!" crap, labeling WCW a "Commie!" organization, and hoped you could stick that label on Cindy. Essentially, you created a false premise, strung together some facts about something else, and tried (and failed) to make your point. My kid, at 12, used to try this sort of thing on me, and it is almost laughable.

So, as a challenge, prove your premise: "World Can't Wait, a leftwing communist revolutionary organization, has been whispering in her ear for some time now."

1- Post the quote and link to back up this claimed "whispering in her ear for some time now". Define, "for some time now".
2- state the contents of the "whispered conversation"
3- prove that what ever was said in the supposed "whisper" was acted upon by Cindy. Prove that she altered her behavior after falling under the influence of your claimed "whisper" Facts only please.

[eridani]

148. You just can't be too careful about the Communist Threat these days

If you don't watch out, you might wind up getting crushed under a statue of Lenin being toppled by a gang of Bulgarians wearing Guess jeans.

[eridani]

149. Who is this "America" that does everything wrong?

I don't think that our ruling elite is "America". The rest of us poor saps who just live here might actually have a better claim to that designation.

[Zorra]

150. Them damn radical commie pinko hippies is what's destroyin' Murica!

Why, they's even conspirin' to end the dang war. Bunch o' leftist librul traitors, I say.

INDICTMENT
The SEPTEMBER 1968 GRAND JURY charges:

1. Beginning on or about April 12, 1968, and continuing through on or about August 30, 1968, in the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, and elsewhere,

DAVID T. DELLINGER,
RENNARD C. DAVIS,
THOMAS E. HAYDEN,
ABBOTT H. HOFFMAN,
JERRY C. RUBIN,
LEE WEINER,
JOHN R. FROINES and
BOBBY SEALE,

Overt Acts
At the times hereinafter mentioned the defendants committed, among others, the following overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy and to effect the objects thereof:
1. The Grand Jury realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in Counts 11 through VIII of this indictment, each of which count is alleged as a separate and distinct overt act.
2. On or about July 23, 1968, JERRY C. RUBIN spoke to an assemblage of persons at 48th Street and Park Avenue, New York, New York.
3. On or about July 25, 1968, THOMAS E. HAYDEN spoke to an assemblage of persons at the Diplomat Hotel, New York, New York.
4. On or about August 1, 1968, RENNARD C. DAVIS spoke to an assemblage of persons at 30 West Chicago Avenue, Chicago, Illinois.
5. On or about August 15, 1968, RENNARD C. DAVIS, THOMAS E. HAYDEN and JOHN R. FROINES participated in a meeting at Lincoln Park, Chicago, Illinois.
6. On or about August 18, 1968, RENNARD C. DAVIS, LEE WEINER and JOHN R. FROINES participated in a meeting at 1012 North Noble Street, Chicago, Illinois.
7. On or about August 20, 1968, RENNARD C. DAVIS, ABBOT H. HOFFMAN, LEE WEINER and JOHN R. FROINES participated in a meeting at the National Mobilization Committee office at 407 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois.
8. On or about August 24,1968, DAVID T. DELLINGER, RENNARD C. DAVIS, THOMAS E. HAYDEN, ABBOTT H. HOFFMAN, LEE WEINER and JOHN R. FROINES attended a "marshal" training session at Lincoln Park, Chicago, Illinois.
9. On or about August 25,1968, DAVID T. DELLINGER, RENNARD C. DAVIS, THOMAS E. HAYDEN and ABBOTT H. HOFFMAN met at the National Mobilization Committee office at 407 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois.
10. On or about August 26,1968, RENNARD C. DAVIS, JERRY C. RUBIN, LEE WEINER, and JOHN R. FROINES met at Lincoln Park, Chicago, Illinois.
11. On or about August 27, 1968, JERRY C. RUBIN, BOBBY G. SEALE and others spoke to an assemblage of persons at Lincoln Park, Chicago, Illinois.
12. On or about August 28, 1968, DAVID T. DELLINGER, THOMAS E. HAYDEN, JERRY C. RUBIN and others spoke to an assemblage of persons at Grant Park, Chicago, Illinois.
13. On or about August 29, 1968, LEE WEINER and JOHN R. FROINES engaged in a conversation at Grant Park, Chicago, Illinois.
All in violation of Section 371 of Title 18, United States Code.

[ProudDad]

154. Typical wild wooollllfffie flame bait

But, consider the source. From this OP, I expect nothing but flame bait...

[mogster]

156. Projected fear of communism

How quaint.

[Name removed]

157. Deleted message

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

[Tsiyu]

161. I don't eat that shit - it's bad for you

Try a plant-based diet if you can.

Cindy has one mission: to end the war and bring our troops home.


And your mission? To keep repeating anything that will distract form the war. WEll, here. I'll try your technique:



Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq.Her son died in Iraq.Her son died in Iraq.Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. Her son died in Iraq. and so on.



Do you have a son, Mr. Red Meat? Hope not. Because if you can't understand the grief that would drive a parent to keep this issue of war at the forefront of our consciousness, you may not have what it takes to be a good parent.

[nam78_two]

162. Whatever your opinion of "World can't wait"

They have organized some of the largest anti-war protests in this country and that makes them valuable for the anti-war movement. As someone who has attended and tried to organize protests and knows just how hard it is (as opposed to posting on DU which is the easiest thing in the world), I respect their ability to turn people out in large no.s and make a statement and no I don't think it "makes us look fringe/radical" whatever. Anti-war protests are key to ending this situation in Iraq at least imo.
You don't have to agree with everything they say or do and you don't have to agree with eveything the Dems say or do :shrug:.
I read some of their literature on Mao and China that I strongly disagreed with, I read a lot of other stuff from them on the war, Iran etc. that I agreed with-its not black and white.

I can't believe the amount of time we spend bashing Cindy Sheehan here and the no. of recommends any post doing this gets. Btw this little snipe was in particularly bad taste:
"I could go on about her, delving into some particulary unsavory alegations about her personal character, but I won't."

If you didn't plan on going there, why did you put it in your post?

[rhett o rick]

163. I am curious. Have you ever marched in a anti-war rally?

You probably haven't. There would be socialists and communists in the rally (democracy in action). But since the democrats don't have a democrat-only anti-war rally, I'm guessin' you stay home and criticize those that march. If we don't find a good end to this war, it won't matter if you are a good democrat or not. I don't blame Cindy for being impatient, we (yes me and you) have given up (without much of a fight) almost all our liberties and we are extremely close to WW III. Also, our government has already started locking up individuals in an interment camp. Someone said that fascism comes in with baby steps, but with this administration, it is coming in like gangbusters. I'm just sayin'.

[enough already]

165. Nice analysis, Joe McCarthy

The commies are everywhere, right? What an utter load of bullshit.

[proud patriot]

167. I'm locking this thread

I have tried to keep it clean of personal attacks .

This thread has turned very vicious, the consensus
is to lock.

Sincerely

proud patriot Moderator
Democratic Underground