I'm grateful to Cindy Sheehan, BUT

[cali]

she's no longer helping the cause she cares about so deeply. I'm grateful to her for drawing the eyes of the nation to the disaster that this war is, in the summer of 2004. She was effective.

Now, I believe, she's counter-productive. The dems aren't going to listen to her, particularly when her rhetoric is as over the top as this:

Sheehan said any additional authorizations would make the Democrats "co-conspirators" with the Republican in what she described as war crimes.

"There is already enough money in their killing budget to bring the troops home," Sheehan said.
http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/blogs/politicalticker/2007/01/sheehan-war-protesters-interrupt-dem.html


Or this:

"With the transfer of power in the legislative branch of Congress, our nation has a unique opportunity for true change in 2007. But with the Democratic leadership cozying up to the killers who have led our country down a path of destruction in the name of "bipartisanship" - which in this case can only be truthfully called criminal collusion - we have little hope of the change that we the people voted overwhelmingly for this past November."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=2977436

That's just two examples. There are plenty more.

Who listens to Cindy Sheehan at this point? A small group on the left applaud her every word and that's it. She may think she's speaking for some vast number of voters, but truly she isn't. Most Americans, I can guarantee you, don't identify with her now. And the more over the top her rhetoric, the less support she'll get. Sorry, she really isn't helping the cause of ending the war when she does stuff like interrupting the dem's press conference today, and accusing them of being co-conspirators to a criminal undertaking.

This thread is not intended to start a flame war. As I said, I'll always be grateful to Sheehan for what she did in the summer of 2004. I have great sympathy for her loss. I understand that she's trying to make a difference. I just don't think her actions and words over the past year or so, have done anything to help.

[paulk]

1. I agree with you -

Sheehan was a powerful voice early on - but, she allowed herself to be co-opted by the extreme left, and now her efforts against the war are detrimental to her own goals.

[Rosemary2205]

8. Who went looking for who

This whole thing about Cindy Sheehan being a victim of the far left is somethign I've read over and over. It seems to me Cindy is a grown woman of average or above intelligence who can certainly figure out if her alliances are "like minded". I would think they all went looking for each other?????

[paulk]

38. perhaps you're right

they sought each other out.

[coalition_unwilling]

195. What you call the "extreme left" is really good old-fashioned

liberalism. Sheehan is not a Democratic Socialist as far as I know, and Dem Socialists and Communists anchor the "extreme left," at least as political scientists use the phrase.

[Sequoia]

2. And to think she considered running against Feinstein.

HA! You gotta earn your stipes baby.

[derby378]

20. But Feinstein has to prove she's still worthy of hers

That's one reason so many of us were upset with Joe Lieberman - he apparently began to feel that he was entitled to that Senate seat, CT Democrats be damned.

[Sequoia]

31. I'm hearing ya. That alone (Cindy's running dreams) should make her wake up and

now rest on her laurels.

[displacedtexan]

3. Interesting thing about "over the top" protesters...

Without them, there's no middle ground for both sides to meet upon
and agree on anything. For example, without Madalyn Murray O'Hair,
we'd still be reciting Bible verses in public schools.

[Reterr]

4. word.nt

[Lone_Star_Dem]

18. Very good point. n/t

[H2O Man]

92. But answer this:

Shouldn't Martin Luther King, Jr have just listened to those Voices of Reason who told him to calm down? I mean, I liked Martin and everything. Especially when he did exactly what I wanted him to do, so that I was comfortable making him into a projection of my own ego. But then he went and wrote that nasty Letter from the Birmingham Jail. The Voices of Reason were able to ignore him then, weren't they?

And, while I'm at it, I wish the Beatles had just sang songs like "She Loves You." The country would be better for it today. But no, John and Yoko did those silly protests against the war. That's why no one remembers John, though everyone sings that classic hit by "Rainbow" (aka Sissy Spacek) from her first recording, "John You Went Too Far This Time." Will everyone sing with me:

"Everything you asked of me I did John,
from holding hands to living
in a sunlight submarine;
... but since that picture
I don't think our love will be the same."

It brings me to tears every time. Thanks, Sissy. Thanks, Pat Boone. Pat Boone never went on demonstrations.

I don't think Cindy, Martin, or John are likely to be playing Vegas. They changed.

[grace0418]

108. I wish I could recommend this reply.

Excellent. Thank you.

[H2O Man]

122. Thank you.

I think it is important for people to recognize that Cindy is speaking for a large group of people. The attempts to marginalize this by talking about the "far left" seems more out of touch than Cindy does.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

130. "Far left" apparently means

"Anything that gets the powers that be upset."

[H2O Man]

134. Correct.

I would suggest that people read Stephen B. Oates' 1982 book, "Let the Trumpet Sound: The Life of Martin Luther King, Jr." Starting on page 421, Oates details the vicious response that the media and others had to King's "Beyond Vietnam" speech.

[Ms. Clio]

172. Also "Civilities and Civil Rights: Civil Rights Protests in Greensboro, North Carolina

From a book review here: http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/71954/book_review_civilities_and_civil_rights.html

Greensboro, North Carolina was a microcosm of the South in that it displayed every characteristic of the Civil Rights movement. The vast arrays of African-American struggles are revealed through William H. Chafe’s story of Greensboro, and it’s white and black inhabitants. False moderation, peaceful protest, failed agreements, racial violence, student arrests all rapped inside a web of lies and deceit. These actions and consequences are the rewards, the fruits of African-American Civil Rights, turning up stale time after time until those in power came to realize that the devoted hearts responsible for public unrest were determined to change the course of history. “Civilities and Civil Rights” asks us the question does civility belong in protest.

When one is attempting to fight a power structure that claims to be enlightened and responsive to educated discussion and discourse, how does the outsider make his or her voice known, how is the outsider heard when the voice is that of threatening change?


Chafe defined "civility" as "a way of dealing with people and problems that made good manners more important than substantial action."

[acmejack]

161. Thank you.

I truly appreciate your wisdom, H20man.

[coalition_unwilling]

197. I wish John Brown had confined himself to making speeches

against slavery. We might not have had the Civil War. Of course, we might still have slaves. But, hey, what do I know?

[yurbud]

178. OP's line was said against MLK too: "For goodness sakes, be REASONABLE. They will give you what

you want if you just be quiet. Didn't that work to end slavery?"

And of course we all know the Vietnam War ended because people simply voted for Democratic Party establishment types who had the publics best interest at heart.

[nosmokes]

194. Go Cindy! Shout it from the Rooftops! End This Bloody War! NO MO DOUGH!

y'all used to bitch about the GOPosse putting party before country, well what is this? cut the funding for anything but keeping the troops safe and getting them out. it's that simple. oh no, that make us unelectable says all the democrats. well, what's the priority? lives or electability?

[novalib]

5. You Speak

Your post sound VERY MUCH like the things that were said about Cindy when she first went to Crawford and first established Camp Casey.

"Way too over the top". "No one listens to her" "Her ONLY supporters are those on the fringes of the Left".

WE'VE HEARD ALL THE NAYSAYERS about Cindy BEFORE!!!

And they were WRONG about her then!!!

And they are WRONG about her now!!!

Cindy has ALWAYS SPOKEN THE TRUTH TO POWER!!!!

That is why some of us have ALWAYS admired her!!!!

She has NOT changed!!!

YOU HAVE!!!!

[moez]

64. Yeah, you're right....

none of that "Occupied New Orleans" was over the top at all...

[ronnykmarshall]

90. Jesus!

:eyes:

[Robbien]

6. Without her voice, the peace movement would almost have none at all

You need people such as Sheehan because the quieter voices are not getting heard at all.

[cali]

9. That's simply not true

I went to two huge marches in DC well before Cindy Sheehan arrived on the scene. There have been many, many people working against the war for a long time now. As I said, I'm glad for what she did in the summer of 2004, and that the media put such a bright spotlight on her, but frankly at this point, she's not effective. She won't be listened to by dems, or backed by the vast majority of Americans. She's turning off more people then she's inspiring.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

16. True, but she got the media's attention

And in doing so elevated the number of people listening.

[Robbien]

22. The Dems are not going to listen because the Dems are FOR war as a party

The two huge marches you marched in and the ones I marched in and the hundreds held all over the country are just ignored. The only people paying attention to the marches are those of us who march. The Democrats in power are listening to defense industry lobbyists and AIPAC.

So the only voice that the Democratic party leaders hear is Cindy's. Without her voice, they believe we all agree with warmongering.

[cali]

29. Baloney.

Senator Feingold
Senator Leahy
Senator Levin
Senator Sanders
Senator Kennedy
Representative Kucinich
Representative Conyers

and many, many more. Your statement about the dem leadership is just ridiculous and a slur.

[Robbien]

36. That is individual support. Go look at the Democratic party platform

It says nothing about getting out of the middle east and stopping the invasion. The Democratic party is Strong on Defense.

During this last election only several individual Democratic candidates ran on a peace platform but the Democratic Party as a whole said nothing about peace. It was mute.

[coalition_unwilling]

198. The Democratic Party supports an imperialist stance, albeit one

in a "velvet glove" when compared to the BFEE's imperialism. Sort of like Mussolini versus Hitler, imho.

[bluewave]

7. She's the only one drawing attention to the immorality

of the war. Everyone else (who matters) seems to think it was a strategic blunder. It is not only a strategic blunder, it's also immoral. And no politician has the balls to say it and insult their constituents. Besides, I doubt many middle voters were glued to their seats watching a Rahm Emanuel press conference.

[cali]

13. Nonsense.

My reps have been speaking to immorality of the war since before the IWR. Hell, one of my Senators compared the IWR to the Tonkin Gulf resolution. My new rep has also spoken out clearly about how wrong the war is. It's ridiculous to say she's the only person who's spoken up.

[bluewave]

24. I said those who matter

IE the ones on CNN, MSNBC, etc. I commend anyone who says it, but the people have to hear it. None of the leadership has said anything like this, or at least where I can find it, and I'm a news junkie. If I haven't seen it, Joe Blow American certainly hasn't. Except from Sheehan.

And like I said, Joe Blow isn't watching Emanuel's press conference.

[cali]

33. Yeh, right.

Because Senator Leahy is just such a minor figure in the Dem party. Hey, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee is just such an inconsequential position. Just like Senator Kennedy and Levin and Feingold and many more.

[NYCGirl]

41. Don't forget "minor figure" John Murtha. NT

[bluewave]

44. Yeah, what about Harry Reid? Chuck Schumer? Joe Biden?

Hillary? All leadership. These guys seem to be getting most of the tv time. You just named 4 guys from very liberal states. I like those guys, don't get me wrong, but it's easy to speak out when your political rear end isn't on the line. She did, and the country has slowly come her way. She paid for it with her son.

Let's put it this way. If the peanut gallery rejects her and rejects her right to speak out, this country isn't worth saving.

[NYCGirl]

48. And do you think they represent ALL Democrats? NT

[bluewave]

55. No. But from 2003 until now, every time a talking head show

needed someone from the D Party to comment on the war, they sent guys like that. John Kerry, our own prez nominee, couldn't even admit he was wrong to VOTE for the thing, let alone its immorality, until what like 3 weeks before the General Election? Our VP nominee Edwards was a believer from the start.

Cindy is needed. I don't think she can politically do much (if any) damage to Democrats anyway. Maybe to Hillary. lol

[NYCGirl]

56. I think that in this last situation, Cindy's blasting the wrong people. NT

[bluewave]

60. I'll agree there. Before bringing 70 protestors to Emanuel's

conference maybe she could have tried a private meeting (maybe she did, I don't know). I think in the end many more Americans will come near to her viewpoint. And even if they don't, the American Idol watchers won't know Cindy Sheehan from Kay Hutchinson (puke).

[NYCGirl]

61. Especially when it's been SO LONG since we've had any power. This interruption

was so wrong in so many ways, IMO.

[bluewave]

65. Probably not necessary. Then again, I'm a dispassionate

observer with no family over there. If the Dems allow this "surge," it could be politically good (giving Bush more rope) but morally on par with funding the contras. With this surge Bush wants to corrupt 20,000 young men by making them destroy, terrorize, and kill innocents. There can be no ambiguity: the Dems must oppose this.

[Bake]

94. That's two totally different things

"Rejects her" and "rejects her right to speak out."

Two entirely different things. I don't reject her right to speak out; she certainly has that right. I have the right, as does everyone else, to say that she is no longer helpful to the cause. That is, we have the right to "reject her." That's a far, far shot from "this country not being worth saving."

Bake

[coalition_unwilling]

199. Much as I hate to admit it, I believe your last sentence should

not be written with the conditional "if" but the simple declarative: The peanut gallery rejects her and her right to speak out. This country isn't worth saving."

[tnlefty]

52. I'm sorry, but I find this rather amusing. People in my neck of the

woods are more likely to pay attention to and listen to Cindy Sheehan because she is a mother who lost her son in a war that they're beginning to really understand was based on lies and Bushit**.

While I envy you your senators, the retired Jeffords, Leahy and Sanders, these same people wouldn't listen to them because.....they've been trained to think of them as far left, NE liberals. Bizarre, huh?

[bluewave]

57. Exactly.

Those men you mention are honorable and fair, but nobody from my state (Washington) gives a hoot about a Senator from Wisconsin (unfortunately).

[tnlefty]

62. Welcome to DU, bluewave! I love Russ Feingold, but I can hear

people around me spitting at the mention of his name, too. He's not a NE liberal elite - he's just a damned liberal! :hi:

[lisa58]

10. It's what she believes...

...it's what she's been working on since the death of her son, she's not going to change because the majority party has changed - she's going to ask them to listen to her.

[LWolf]

11. Who "listens" to whom...

It seems that part of the American culture is to listen to what makes one feel good, what agrees with one and makes you correct, and not to "listen" to anything else. The rest is "ignored," or taken apart to spin "talking points" and smears to support the "listeners'" povs.

What republican listens seriously to what a democrat says, and what democrat listens seriously to what a republican says, without the goal of taking it apart for propaganda's sake?

To be honest, I don't understand why anyone listens to the talking heads on the media. If no one did, what they said would have no power, would it? Yet people keep giving them that power, even when what they hear pisses them off.

Also to be honest, I don't know why people listen to, and repeat, campaign rhetoric. The impassioned words of campaigners rarely reflect their actual actions, their past record, or what they will do in the future. Yet people listen.

All kinds of people are listening to all kinds of public figures, whether we agree with them or not. Who is listening to Cindy Sheehan, or others we may agree with? I don't know, but I wouldn't silence them, and I wouldn't say that public discussion or debate is "counter productive." Is she helping? I think she has. Whether or not her current actions make a difference remains to be seen, but continuing to act and speak has a greater chance to "make a difference" than allowing herself to be silenced.

I wonder about those who would like to silence her. Is the "counter productive" part where she makes it harder for complicit Democrats to excuse, cloud, or otherwise distort their complicity?

I hope she keeps talking. As MLK said, Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.

[Reterr]

72. Interesting points

I also always wonder about the "She is in a minority", "This opinion will never become mainstream" kinds of arguments. Who defines mainstream or majority? If a certain opinion is around long enough and repeated often enough, could it become mainstream? I think its highly likely.

Its very stifling to always have to toe some imaginary line and have to hold back from stating what you believe is true so you have appeal for the "mainstream".To take some cliched examples MLK, Rosa Parks etc. weren't exactly "mainstream", "appealing to the centre" etc. in their times.
What is "mainstream" is something that should be continually in a flux and changing in such an imperfect society. If we think the status quo is so bad, we should be pushing for changing that, not for appealing to a majority opinion that seems so often wrong.

IMO there is so much wrong with the centre/mainstream in this country that we need a few radicals. Honestly I think the American left is itself significantly right shifted (at least right now)-this county drifted very far right after 9/11.

[LWolf]

200. Agree, and thanks for your thoughts. n/t

[Alamom]

12. Another interesting fact....there were thousands of Cindys during

Vietnam. They were called names and told they weren't helping either.


Maybe their timing wasn't right..........:sarcasm:











edit; Forgot sarcasm

[cali]

25. Sorry, I really believe

that Cindy Sheehan has a reponsibility to do more than toss out incendiary rhetoric. And lately, that's pretty much all she's been doing.

[Alamom]

27. Sorry , I believe she's made the ultimate sacrifice and has every

right to voice her opinion of this war of choice FOREVER if she chooses to do so.

[cali]

35. I'm not denying her right.

I agree with you; she has every right to speak her mind. I'm simply saying that her words and actions, exeplified by today's interruption of the dem press conference are marginalizing her voice.

[verse18]

51. The only person trying to marginalize Cindy is you.

"I'm simply saying that her words and actions, exeplified by today's interruption of the dem press conference are marginalizing her voice."

Would you have the guts to interrupt Congress on behalf of your murdered child and other murdered US citizens? Cindy is strongly reminding the Democrats why they were elected back into power and I applaud her for that.

[mzteris]

118. she's not alone

there are plenty of Du'ers who agree with what she's saying.

I've thought it for a long time but never wanted to say because of all the Cindy worshippers here.

I'm sorry for her loss. I applaud her spirit in standing up.

She just needs to exercise a little better judgement, imo.

If (some of ) *we* (du'ers) think she's over the top, what do you think mainstream Americans think of her 'tactics', eh?

[Alamom]

54. I'm afraid you don't agree with me at all. I believe she has the

right to speak out anytime, anywhere & say what she believes.

I don't for an instant think I have the right to tell her what she should be doing and how she should be doing it as you are doing.

[cali]

66. I'm expressing an opinion on her words and actions

I think she's become a liability. Don't like my opinion? Tough. I have every fucking right to it , and to express it. And I'm not telling Sheehan what she should or shouldn't do or say, just saying what I think about her.

You want to idolize her, go right ahead. I stay away from that myself.

[Alamom]

69. As am I. n/t

[No Exit]

45. Hear, hear!

We can't micromanage every person who fits roughly into the same political views as ourselves. I see articles every day by/about people whom I want to cheer on, because they advocate a particular position that I may agree with--yet I doubt I could find very many people whose methods of expression I'd agree with 100%!

They should let her do her own thing, her own way. She has a genuineness about her that is not seen in the slick, sophisticated, hyper-educated, TV-ready types. (Yes, we NEED our own slick, sophisticated, hyper-educated TV-ready types, sometimes--but we also need the Cindy Sheehans of this world.

[Skidmore]

150. What else does she need to do?

What else can any of us do? Is it then incendiary rhetoric to demand an end to the war and to remind people of the lies that were told to get us there?

Would self-immolation be enough in your estimation?

[PA Democrat]

196. I am curious as to why you believe that Cindy Sheehan has a "responsibility" to

act in a fashion of which you or I approve. Was she elected by us to some office? We all disagree with the war. Cindy is following her conscience. If you disagree with her tactics, by all means you are entitled to say so, and YOU should use tactics of which YOU approve to seek an end to our involvement in Iraq. But Cindy has no responsibility to YOU or to anyone else.

[shadowknows69]

14. Cindy is beyond reproach in my opinion

She lost a son in this mad conflict, period. I for one won't ever question her motivation or method beyond that.

[thereismore]

19. do you have a soecial need to smear Cindy? She does what she

believes in. What have you done?

[shadowknows69]

23. You weren't replying to me were you?

I hope not because I'm definitely on Cindy's side.

[thereismore]

47. Oops, sorry, it was meant for whoever started the thread. Peace and hugs.

[Bake]

100. The fact that she lost a son is tragic, but that's all.

It doesn't make her opinion any more legitimate than anyone else's. Nor does it make her "above reproach," particularly if she does something stupid. Attacking the Dems before they even take over is, IMHO, a bit premature on her part.

Bake

[Bucky]

15. She held her fire at Democrats until after the election.

She didn't run against DiFi. She didn't muddle the impact of the antiwar vote by any loony talk about "Republicrats." Her politics I may not always agree with, but her tactics are hardly detrimental to our cause now. In November '08 no one's gonna care what was said in the winter and spring of '07. Voters will only look at what Democrats have accomplished as far as tamping down the war, holding the neocons accountable, and ending the culture of corruption.

[No Exit]

37. Yeah! Yes, I support Feinstein, but her husband IS making big profits off this

series of wars.

And I don't view Diane Feinstein as being quite as helpful to the progressive, anti-war, cause as, say, Barbara Boxer or Russ Feingold or John Murtha... and yes, I know that NO MEMBER of congress, even a democrat, can claim to be Snow White.

And if Cindy Sheehan IS blaming democrats, or threatening to blame democrats, how is that any different from the constant, annoying, irritating, unfair DRUMBEAT of repukes who have incessantly sought to blame democrats who voted for the war?? Yes, certain democrats voted for the war, but for Chrissake, the repukes keep up their constant drumbeat IN ORDER TO DETRACT ATTENTION FROM THE FACT THAT IT WAS THEY--SPECIFICALLY, THEIR BUSH/CHENEY--WHO STARTED THIS WHOLE THING! NOT democrats!!!! (With the exception of LIEberman, the "Manchurian candidate".)

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

17. Very Well Put And Civil.

I agree with you for the most part. I cut her a bit of slack because I know the pain she's gone through and recognize the good she's done, but I definitely think for some time now she's been over the top with her rhetoric. It started for me back when she challenged Feinstein.

God bless her, but I don't agree with a lot of what she says now either.

[yurbud]

191. Feinstein needed to be challenged, at the very least as a reminder she needs to represent her

constituents, and not just do window dressing for the plebes while quietly profiting from the war through her husband's contracts.

Since then Feinstein has said and done better on the war. It may not be as a result of Cindy's potential challenge alone, but she needed her feet in the fire.

[Marie26]

21. It takes all kinds

The firebrands & the moderates, liberals & the conservatives. This war is wildly unpopular, & Sheehan was one of the first to really spur public opposition to the war.

[Rosemary2205]

28. I agree with you

Cindy Sheehan is indeed "over the top" - she was from the start. We need the firebrands to keep the debate lit up. While few people will agree with her 100% it will make them think. Which, IMHO is the whole point.

[Philosoraptor]

26. oh please

gimmee a break.

[MsUnderstood]

30. maybe we should be listening to her more

Have you heard the budget cuts bush is discussing?

Not one cent will be cut from the military machine pumping life and blood into the ground in Iraq (in fact he is hinting at INCREASING TROOP LEVELS) but he'll be cutting agriculture and social security and medicare.

Bush wants to BALANCE THE BUDGET but wont cut the WAR. Democrats need to be told we want them to do what the president refuses--stop the war.

Bush is telling congress to stop the spending that HIS REPUBLICANS did for the last 10 years like the democrats are at fault. You say "who is listening to Cindy" while she states the obvious that if you are trying to extend an olive branch to the warmongers wasting money and giving big breaks to corporations while the middle class declare bankruptcy and wave goodbye to their children.

Remember it is not the rich who send their kids to war, it is the middle class and poor. If the democrats don't move to stop the war (impeachment, act of congress, repeal of the provision that gave Bush the "authority" then they are commiting a crime.

Cindy maybe over the top but she is a necessary force in this crazyness that is american politics. Keeping her quiet will not make the democratic cause better.

We Americans need to keep pushing at the republicans until they are on our side, not trying to bring them to the middle by meeting them halfway.

[No Exit]

32. Casey Sheehan's death was sad, but let's look on the bright side!

That's one less person in the world--and as we all know, the world is overpopulated!

Notice how all the chattering classes called Gerald Ford "The Accidental President"? Well, Cindy Sheehan is "The Accidental Protestor".

It appears to me that Cindy Sheehan's activities against the war are not something that she dreamed up one New Year's--perhaps sitting at a fashionable coffehouse with well-heeled friends, in between ski trips to Aspen--while saying, "Ya know, I've got so much in life (my Master's, my 7-figure-earning hubby, my own considerable income, our new vacation home in Carmel), but I just think I want my life to be more MEANINGFUL! I want to help humankind, and make a difference!"

It appears to me that Cindy Sheehan was devastated by gut-tearing grief when she realized not only that her son had died, but that he had died for NOTHING (except for the greedy aspirations of some of the most evil, avaricious bastards we've ever seen). It appears to me that she was driven to do and say some somewhat impolite things, due to the hold this awful grief had on her. It appears that she still struggles with this grief, and sense of waste, every day.

Believe me, cali, if it had been *I* whose first born child had been killed (wasted) in this way, I cannot guarantee that my actions and words would have been as lawful and as moderate as Sheehan's have been! Because I might have succumbed to the terrible ANGER that such a needless loss would cause me.

Let's leave Sheehan alone. There's enough to complain about regarding the aforementioned GREEDY, EVIL, AVARICIOUS, MURDEROUS BASTARDS, without turning on a woman who, in her own way, has helped all of us who hate this fraudulent series of wars.

[yurbud]

192. those dragging feet on ending war have personal investment too--the financial kind

Democrats aren't immune to use public office to pursue business by other means, looking for their next job while in office, or getting a "bonus" from someone who would like to get something done.

You see it in local politics all the way down to the school district level. The fundamental sin of the Bushies is that they did it so obviously that they ruined the scam for everyone else.

When you see a pol supporting something that is morally indefensible, it's not some deep policy mystery we can't fathom or ideology-- money has changed hands.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

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

[Beaverhausen]

46. One can disagree with Cindy's tactics while still agreeing with her

I'm on her side and want our troops home, I just think this stunt she pulled today wasn't her most shining moment.

[BuyingThyme]

49. What stunt? Speaking out?

[ronnykmarshall]

93. Jesus 2!

:eyes:

[LittleClarkie]

95. Or, perhaps, mere disagree with her methods

And should be able to express that disagreement civilly without being insulted.

[BuyingThyme]

101. Nope, it's about the people towards whom the methods are

targeted. Goose/gander.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted sub-thread

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

[Fire Walk With Me]

42. Strong words, but the need for action is clear, and bless her for chasing it.

[dogday]

50. She has served her purpose so let's throw her out

now, because we don't want such a radical lefty being associated with us... Is that about the size of this picture? If so, it is not a pretty one, and I for one support Cindy in every effort she makes to end this war...

[cynatnite]

53. I think she was the right person and the right place and time...

She drew a lot of much needed attention to the immorality of the war. I don't agree with all her positions, but if she wants to push on...go for it.

She doesn't get much attention from corporate media these days.

Good luck. I hope you don't get slammed too badly here at DU for your opinion.

[BlackVelvet04]

58. I agree with Cindy.....

if the Democratic Congress approves more money for the war they are in fact just as guilty as the republicans.

I thought we wanted the Dems to have power in order to actually get things done....like stop the war. I didn't vote for a Democrat just to have business as usual.

[BuyingThyme]

59. Okay, Cali, tell us what "rhetoric" was "over the top"?

Do you believe Bush hasn't committed war crimes? Or do you simply believe that the war crimes should be ignored when Democrats support them?

Here's your big chance to explain it to us.

Besides your desire to support particular Democrats in whatever they do, what is your beef with Cindy Sheehan? Explain your post.

[cali]

67. I believe that

calling the dems criminal collaborators with bushco is over the top.

[BuyingThyme]

70. So, if Dems join Bush, Bush is no longer a criminal?

Or is it that you have a different war-criminal standard for Dems?

I think I understand your double standard; I just don't understand which way it cuts.

[LittleClarkie]

129. Did you really want to know what cali meant? Just wondering.

You seem a tad hostile. Like even the request for explanation was a confrontation of sorts.

The Dems are asking Bush to join them, not the other way around.

And attacking them before they've had a chance to show what they're going to do doesn't seem terribly swift somehow.

We elected them. I'd like to see what they're going to do.

Cindy is reacting to the usual rhetoric that comes out of elections, without waiting to see what the actions will be. And the Republicans have already signaled that they will not act in a bipartisan manner, but instead intend to stonewall the Dems as they set about giving the people what the people elected them for. Hence, all bet are off, and the Dems will be bulldozing their agenda through.

She being entirely too preemptive. And a person should be able to have a comment about Cindy Sheehan without being considered "the enemy" for doing so. She's not sacrosanct.

[BuyingThyme]

132. Here's why you are completely wrong:

Cindy hasn't changed anything. She's doing exactly what she was doing a year ago. The election didn't change anything for her.

So who's changed? And, more importantly, why?

[noamnety]

63. I don't understand the problem with the quotes you posted

If the democrats continue to vote in ways that support Bush's war (and I believe they will, just as they have been doing), then she's right. They are co-conspirators.

Where's the flaw in the logic?

I think the problem is that a lot of folks are unwilling to face the ugly truth, which is that the democrats are much more fond of saying "I never would have started this war" than they are of actually ending it.

[cali]

71. What's wrong with this quote?

But with the Democratic leadership cozying up to the killers who have led our country down a path of destruction in the name of "bipartisanship" - which in this case can only be truthfully called criminal collusion -


It's not true. That's what's wrong with it. And the dems haven't even been sworn in yet.

[noamnety]

77. They've BEEN funding the war

Perhaps you didn't notice?

If they quit funding it, I assume her criticism of them colluding with the killers will stop. If they continue funding it, I assume her criticism will continue.

So ... you think they'll continue funding it?

[cali]

96. They don't have the votes to halt funding of the war

If only things were as simple as many DUers think they are. I do think, however, the dems should introduce legislation cutting off funding for the war. And they are indeed doing that with Jim McGovern’s (D-Ma) bill, HR4232. So we'll see what kind of support McGovern's bill gets. In the meantime, I wish people would let them get sworn in before calling them collaborators in a criminal war.

[noamnety]

128. I don't follow your logic

Are you saying they had a moral obligation to vote to continue to fund the war, because if they voted against it, they would have been outnumbered?

The way I understand congress, they don't have a moral obligation to figure out who will win the vote, and then unanimously vote that way. They're supposed to vote for what's right, even if they lose the vote.

The ones already in office who voted for the war, or voted to continue funding the war once it started, are indeed collaborators. Every bit as much as the republicans who voted that way were. This is not a matter of "I think they will turn into collaborators." They already collaborated. Past tense.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

136. Whether they have the votes or not, they should keep reintroducing

bills to cut off funding every day if need be.

[puebloknot]

120. The Dems began cozying up when they voted for the war.

And they've shown little inclination to do much but go along to get along since then.

I think that Cindy is employing the past tense here. She's basing her comments on what we've all had in front of our very eyes for lo, these years since this cursed war was started.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

68. In the 60's most of the population in the US disagreed with the counterculture

Yet their anti-war message was able to eventually spread doubts about the wisdom of escalation in Vietnam to the average people, and even the administration itself in time.

Cindy has helped influence Americans to question our reasons for going to war and our reasons for staying. Even if many, or perhaps most, of those listening don't agree with her methods of spreading her message they have begun the process of questioning. For that I'm an forever grateful to Cindy for having the courage to ask why and forcing Americans to do so also.

[cali]

74. The anti-war movement of the sixties

was a mixed bag. Yes, it helped end the war, but it gave us a legacy that's still a sword hanging over our heads by demonizing the grunts who fought that war.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

80. And the anti-war movement of today has not made that mistake

One more thing to add in Cindy's favor, she's very vocal in her desire to bring them home whole.

However, the mistakes of those in the 60's doesn't negate their eventual effectiveness. They were among the lead dominoes in the chain that eventually made Americans turn their back on waging the war in Vietnam. And they did it without Americans even approving of who they were.

[Lars39]

82. The grunts were abused by the leaders that put them in an unjust war.

[omega minimo]

73. King George must have thought the Founders were "over the top" as well

Your final comments sound very smug and comfy/cozy as you criticize someone who has put her life on hold and her body on the line. She fights for your rights cali and her work might even help save your judgemental, middle-class pretensions.

"Who listens to Cindy Sheehan at this point? A small group on the left applaud her every word and that's it. She may think she's speaking for some vast number of voters, but truly she isn't. Most Americans, I can guarantee you, don't identify with her now. And the more over the top her rhetoric, the less support she'll get. Sorry, she really isn't helping the cause of ending the war when she does stuff like interrupting the dem's press conference today, and accusing them of being co-conspirators to a criminal undertaking.

"... I just don't think her actions and words over the past year or so, have done anything to help."


You may not like the way she says it, but what she is saying is true.

Saying you don't think she has "done anything to help" over the past year or so just makes you look bad (or uninformed) not her.

I hope some day you get to meet her. She is very down to earth. Being in the same room and the same crowd with her might help you expand your view.

[cali]

75. I'm sure she's a lovely person

but I don't agree with you that everything she's saying is true.

[omega minimo]

78. it doesn't matter if you agree. it matters that someone challenges it. someone brave. not sniffy.

[k_jerome]

76. I agree. She is doing more harm than good at this point...

however, I cannot question the motivation for her actions.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

81. As much harm as will be done if the war is continually funded?

[k_jerome]

87. her actions have no bearing on that...

they can have a negative effect.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

99. How so?

It seems to me that if the Dems cave and continue funding the war that will certainly have a "negative effect". Except for the "defense" industry and morticians.

[k_jerome]

103. a negative effect in regards to the general publics attitude about...

the war.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

116. Let's hope the public has a negative attitude about the war.

If so, I rather doubt that Cindy's efforts to end it, will change that attitude to one of desiring to send more troops to the catastrophe or leaving the cannon-fodder there.

[k_jerome]

119. i believe it is obvious that they do...

however, many are those that supported the war at some point. it is possible to turn people off or away from a cause with behavior they find objectionable.

[cali]

89. And just where did I do that? n'/t

[k_jerome]

91. i said nothing about you. i was speaking for myself.

you're gonna get flamed aplenty for your OP. no need looking for it where it does not exist.

[ronnykmarshall]

98. Oh how dare you, you ..... you

HILLARY SUPPORTER!!!!!!

[k_jerome]

105. thats Hillary enabler to you. or DLC'er if you so choose...nt.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

79. Citizens have a right, if not a responsibility, to confront the "leaders".

It's called democracy. It's just too bad there aren't more who will.

[BuyingThyme]

84. Get used to it. DU is falling into the sheep hole.

We're discovering that about half of the population is not interested in democratic values, but only in the Democratic Party.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

86. What a rather famous Democrat had to say about party loyalty.

"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all." --Thomas Jefferson to Francis Hopkinson,

[BuyingThyme]

156. Never heard of him.

Did he have a show on AAR?

[ronnykmarshall]

166. Can you be more obvious?

Cudos for making it this far.

[dogday]

88. May I just say DING DING DING nt

[ronnykmarshall]

107. Yeah that's it.

You called cali a "sheep"???

Uh, isn't a "sheep" someone that is 100% in lock step with what they are told?

Wow! cali makes a comment that she didn't agree with Cindy Sheehan and all of a sudden she's (he?) "questionable".

Talk about drinking the koolaid.

For the record, I think Cindy Sheehan's fantastic. And I DON'T agree with what she did today.

So please add me to "The List".

[BuyingThyme]

111. You don't agree with interrupting press conferences?

Or is it that you don't agree with the press conferences of your shepherds being interrupted?

[ronnykmarshall]

115. Like I said ....

Add me to "The List".

[LittleClarkie]

151. As long as Cindy is the sheep herder

It's apparently cool to be a sheep.

When DID we declare her infallable, is what I wanna know.

[LittleClarkie]

148. You don't care if they're sheep, as long as the sheep are following you

or those you deem worthy, I reckon.

[BuyingThyme]

152. Yes, I get that way when it comes to war crimes.

How embarrassing for me.

[yurbud]

177. the OP sounds like a DLC shill. If you did a poll on this, you'd see where DU sympathies really lie

[cali]

185. You mean because I don't agree with you

100% I must be a DLCer. Wrong. Couldn't be more wrong. I'm a liberal democrat, a Bernie Sanders Vermont progressive. Fuck your kind of bullying thinking. I don't buy MY ideas wholesale, off the shelf sloganeering bullshit just doesn't appeal to me.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

83. They said the same sort of thing about King.

"Oh, my odds and bodkins, I think those people are treated unfairly. But this uppity King fellow is just trying to rile things up. The only people that listen to him are those crazy New York liberals."

If Democrats don't pull the troops out immediately they deserve every bit of criticism that the republicans are due.

[BuyingThyme]

85. Amen.

And Sheehan's tactics are far, far less abrasive than King's.

It makes one wonder what these Sheehan bashers would have said about King.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

97. Heh.

"It makes one wonder what these Sheehan bashers would have said about King."

I already told you.

:P

[BuyingThyme]

106. Yes, you did, didn't you.

[cali]

110. Wrong.

King's rhetoric couldn't possibly have been more different than Sheehan's. You've created a logical fallacy; a complete strawman construct by saying that if one criticizes Sheehan one must not have supported King. What a crock of predictable shit from you.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

113. How so?

What are the major differences between King's and Sheehan's "rhetoric?"

Interesting choice of words, btw.

[cali]

117. It's clear you don't know what the word means, Mr/Ms Hooligan

Not surprising, really. Rhetoric is simply speech meant to persuade. And I suggest you read some of King's speeches. The differences should be clear- even to you.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

123. I've read King's speeches.

Ranging from his civil rights speeches, to how we should have pulled out of Vietnam.

Now, I'm asking that you back up your claims. If you can.

[H2O Man]

126. One might read

the vicious responses to King's famous anti-war speech "Beyond Vietnam."

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

133. Not that I'd be shocked by any such response...

but have you got a link to any?

[H2O Man]

138. I tend to

quote from books. In this case, Stephen B. Oates' 1982 "Let the Trumpet Sound," starting on page 421, has the vicious response that "responsible" folks had to Martin's call to end the Vietnam War.
The attacks were a result of his April 4, 1967 address at the Riverside Church in NYC.

[cali]

102. That's just ignorant

They don't have the power to pull the troops out immediately. They do have the power of the purse strings, and legislation is being introduced by a rep from MA to cut off funding, but the dem caucus does not have the votes. That's just the way it is, and short of holding a gun to the heads of individual legislators, what exactly do you propose. Face it, the blue dogs, are not going to vote against funding, and many of them have constituents who don't want them to do so.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

109. excuses excuses.

[cali]

114. reality, reality. And naturally you have no argument against what

I wrote. You really are two dimensional and utterly unable to actually think beyond sloganeering.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

121. Well, if you really want me to argue.

"They don't have the power to pull the troops out immediately."

No, but they have the power to demand that the troops be pulled out immediately. They have the power to stand firmly and immediately that they're going to do everything in their power to get the troops out immediately. They have the power to agree publically that they agree with Cindy Sheehan.

"They do have the power of the purse strings, and legislation is being introduced by a rep from MA to cut off funding, but the dem caucus does not have the votes."

And why is that? Because some blue dogs are too chicken shit to pull the troops out?

"That's just the way it is, and short of holding a gun to the heads of individual legislators, what exactly do you propose."

My proposition is that I voted for this congress in order to get the troops out immediately. And if they don't do it, I'll look for somebody else who will next time around.

"Face it, the blue dogs, are not going to vote against funding, and many of them have constituents who don't want them to do so."

Well then, they deserve every bit of criticism that Bush did for getting us into the war in the first place. If they don't like it they can cry me a river.

[H2O Man]

125. Keep in mind

that almost the exact excuses were used by those who told Martin that he needed to "move slower" or else he would offend people. If Martin were alive, I think he would be far closer to Cindy than to those who find her offensive.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

135. Sure.

There aren't enough votes for civil rights, the conservative dems won't allow it, the voters won't like it, yadda yadda yadda.

[H2O Man]

141. It got ugly.

People from the democratic party who should have been thankful that Martin was a voice of sanity in a world gone mad, resented his use of "creative tension." Those who have studied King know that he was hurt deeply by this type of attack, far more so than anything that any of his "enemies" ever said. But Martin forgave them. I'm sure Cindy forgives those who are attacking her.

[Synnical]

168. Thank you - I've been thinking the same thing

And trying to come up with a post about how WE have let Cindy Sheehan down by not standing with her!

[bahrbearian]

104. Baloney, Nonsense

[ScreamingMeemie]

This not to fringe-ish Mom says,"Go Cindy"...

Cindy Sheehan has made it possible to speak of things which before her rage (rightful rage) over the wrongful death of her son were forbidden to speak of. John Kerry says what he says in part because of her. John Edwards, Hillary Clinton etal...

Cindy Sheehan says what I want to scream...yet there is no one around to listen.

sorry, but Cindy Sheehan is our "sacrificial lamb" of sorts because too many of us are worried about sounding "radical"... One man's radical is another man's common sense.

[puebloknot]

112. The question is...

...is Cindy speaking the truth, no matter that it may be a little too shrill for some ears?

I wonder how you know that " most Americans (and you guarantee it) don't identify with her now."

And we all need to ask ourselves: Are the Dems, now that they're in power, listening to We, the Voters of November 7, 2006?

I have the same uncomfortable feelings that Cindy has about that. I'm just tucked comfortably at home, writing letters and drinking tea, instead of making myself noticed out on the streets.

I don't think a velvet revolution is going to do it. We're going to get out of the new Congress what we demand, and maybe not even that.

Cindy is that little burr in the seat cushions of our elected officials.

I recall a film (forgot the name now) where a woman's son is abducted, and a year later her best friend is telling her she has to face the music and accept that he is gone. And she says: "*I* will decide when enough time has passed, when I give up hope."

Cindy will decide.

[Catchawave]

124. She aligned herself with the "looney left" ?

I still respect her, but her message got diluted when she hooked up with
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A.N.S.W.E.R.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

143. Well, at least A.N.S.W.E.R. was out there organizing opposition

I kept waiting for the Democrats to organize anti-war rallies when Bush was revving up to invade Iraq, but NO-O-O, they couldn't do that because too many of their own people were either too ignorant or too gullible or too craven to vote against the IWR.

[Catchawave]

160. I was at two "peace marches"

Lots of people, but watered down by many agendas. I guess those who were at DC's and NYC's might agree. Lots of fun, great street carnival, but ...what...did....we...achieve? What is cindy achieving today going after Dems?

There's another one coming up this month:

http://www.unitedforpeace.org/

I'm taking a pass :(

[Lydia Leftcoast]

171. So what are we supposed to do, get Democrats elected?

Oh, wait, we did that already.

[ulysses]

193. expect to reap the benefits any time now!

:D

[Lydia Leftcoast]

127. But if they don't do everything to disengage this country from the

Busheviks' "waging aggressive war, crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity" (cf. the Nuremberg Trials) then they ARE criminal co-conspirators.

Sorry, that's just the way it is.

This war is killing and maiming Americans and innocent Iraqis by the thousands, acting as the best recruitment tool ever for radical Islamic terrorists, destroying what little reputation America has left in the world, and bleeding our economy dry.

If humanitarian and political reasons don't do it, how about fiscal reasons? The war is costing $250 million a day. Two days of the Iraq War would pay for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting for a year. Four days of the Iraq War would pay for Amtrak's typical annual subsidy.

What's so hard to understand about that?

The way some of the Democratic leadership are pussyfooting around the great moral issue that this country faces today is inexcusable.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

131. Well...

...she certainly seems to have fallen in with the intransigent rantophile wing of the anti-war movement (whatever the hell that is nowadays anyway.)

Sad, really.

[Raine]

137. Agreed nt

:banghead:

[EFerrari]

139. You're right. She's not helping the Democrats, she's trying to end the war

as are all people of conscience.

For once, I agree with you.

[emanymton]

140. Hello? Cindy Sheehan Is Saying What Has To Be Said. The Issue ...

is not politics. Moral leadership is what Cindy Sheehan is displaying. Now is the time for the rest of the followers of the political parties to join the march back to the light.

"...Who listens to Cindy Sheehan?" Only the people who recognize just how much has been lost because of shrub's war in Iraq. Those who do not listen do so at their own risk.

Speak on lady. Speak on.

[blues90]

142. perhaps Cindy does not trust politicians

I don't blame her at all . Who can trust any politcian these days after all they have done nothing but prove most of their interests revolve around their career not the voice of the people .

What should she do , sit and wait for some sort of hopeful result like the rest of us sitting on our ass thinking that voting is enough to sit back and hope things work out well ?

[Tom Joad]

144. Do you support full funding for the Iraq war?

[oblivious]

145. Your post is dead wrong Cali. America supports Cindy's agenda according to recent polls.

...Polls show that most Americans are looking to Congress, rather than the president, for leadership, particularly on resolving the war in Iraq.

...Yet Pelosi and the Democrats plan no dramatic steps to influence the course of the war. Nor has the new majority detailed strategies to tackle other challenges that have confounded lawmakers for years, including rising health care costs and the Social Security system.

...Americans overwhelmingly want Congress and the White House to address the war in Iraq first. In a recent Gallup poll, 69 percent said the war should be the top priority, compared with 16 percent who pointed to the economy, which was second.

By contrast, the items on the 100-hour agenda ranked far down on the list.

http://www.heraldnet.com/stories/07/01/03/100wir_a7dems001.cfm


An overwhelming majority - 84 percent - worry that the war is causing too many casualties, according to a September poll by the nonpartisan research group Public Agenda.
http://www.sptimes.com/2007/01/01/Worldandnation/Poll_numbers_drop_as_.shtml

[Lars39]

147. *******69 percent said the war should be the top priority*******

Cannot be said enough!

[Lone_Star_Dem]

157. Agreed

The longer it's postponed the more lives lost. It is no longer a radical left movement, it's even transcended being just a Democratic movement. It's now a national movement.

[BoneDaddy]

146. LOL

Funny how this woman spoke out against the repubs when it was convenient for Dems and those on the left to hear, yet now that her criticisms indict the democrats, she has become a pariah amongst the very people who were singing her praises when it was just Bushco under fire. I give up.

[BuyingThyme]

155. You're not suggesting hypocrisy, are you?

Henny Penny!

[BoneDaddy]

188. Me?

God forbid, hehe.

[Imagevision]

149. Democratic leadership cozying up to the killers who have led our country down a path of destruction

Pelosi and Reid agreed with Bush about surge until the blogs criticized them and they both did a 360...! --> Go Cindy, someone needs to hold the Dems up to their campaign promises! somebody pleeze!

[BuyingThyme]

154. Silly, isn't it?

[Tom Joad]

153. What Cindy is doing is a pretty clever piece of political maneuvering.

We applaud her.

[Tom Joad]

158. Nancy Pelosi has promised not to end funding for this war. Like her promise not to

impeach bush, we need to challange that, with all the strength in our beings.

[bigtree]

159. here you are again cali, criticizing a leader in our peace movement

and claiming "sympathy" for the one you're castigating.

I don't think you have a clue about what needs helping, much less about what Cindy has done to "help." It's only in the minds of freepers and small-minded idiots that Cindy offends. This "small group" that you imagine is the totality of her support is a figment of your retched bias against her.

You are no friend to her cause, so, who really expects you to understand her . . . and why is it important that you get it? It's not, is it? You've obviously gone as far as you're willing, and the rest of us will have carry the stone the rest of the way.

It wasn't moderation and restraint which energized Americans to give our party victory in November. It was the direct result of activists like Cindy who put their reputations on the line to advocate against Bush's militarism, in Iraq and beyond while 'moderates' were wringing their hands over how much they were offended by the extent of their fellow Democrats' liberalism. It's my view that we won't get anywhere near affecting Bush and his warmongering republicans if we don't have folks who are as committed to the cause as is Cindy and her supporters. Moderates want to take us halfway to our goal and wait for the opposition to invite us in. Thanks to Cindy and others like her, we have breached the castle wall, taken down the king''s guard, and are poised to overthrow the king's rule.

And, you want to take a step back and rip Cindy for her activism . . . what a crock. Without aggressive activists like Cindy, we continue to lose. Knee jerk-moderation can only compromise on the basic tenets of humanity that compel us to oppose militarism and war. Unapologetic liberalism, as Cindy practices, promises to end the warmongering madness and everything associated with it. I don't know just why you and others who put activists like Cindy down think there is something the right wing is offering that's worth preserving or worth tearing down our supporters to avoid offending.

[LittleClarkie]

167. Criticism is not bashing, bashing is not criticism

And Cali was civil in his criticism.

[bigtree]

170. this is just another sniveling attack on a decent activist

claiming Cindy's hurting some "cause" for standing up for what she believes.

"Quoting Cali, "Who listens to Cindy Sheehan at this point? A small group on the left applaud her every word and that's it."

That's bashing, Little Clarkie, despite the couching of her bashing in feint praise. Smear Cindy and her supporters as being on the fringe of the movement and you discount the fuel that fired the opposition which enabled us into this position of power. Marginalize Cindy, and you take a chunk out of the base of our opposition to the right wing machine. Amazing how these moderates always think they can stand without their left wing as they lean on the facade of the right.

Nice try to bury Cindy in false praise and crocodile tears about her hurting our "cause," but I'm not buying it.

[MazeRat7]

162. I too appreciate Cindy but will have to agree with you on this...

As best I can tell there are two camps where effecting real change in 07 are concerned...

There is the Whack-a-Mole club and the Chess club.... One wants instant gratification the other is willing to work the system to obtain it....


Hummmmm, I wonder which one stands the best chance of achieving their goal ???

Just asking.....


MZr7

[mzteris]

163. Whack-a-Mole club

:rofl:

That's a good way of putting it!

[LuckyX]

164. What is far left about her saying

this war is criminal? Why did Americans elect the Dems? To get us out of Iraq, ASAP. Why has Pelosi said that impeachment and investigations are off the table? Why did Feinsteins husband get$3.5 billion dollar contracts for goods and services in Iraq and vote for war, yet her campaign ads said "bring the troops home?" Why did John Conyers remove a 325 page document from his website listing the Bush crimes, saying now that he was fooled. Why is Pelosi the new darling of the AIPAC?
Damn I stumbled into the wrong fourm, let me go find the .........far left.

[GeorgeGist]

165. She was accusing the leadership...

and warning the rest. The truth hurts so most Americans prefer being lied to.

[RoyGBiv]

169. Same song, different verse ...

Every word of this, with only slight modification of the quotes, could have been lifted from posts on DU mere days after we first learned who Cindy Sheehan is.

It's boring.

[951-Riverside]

173. YEAH! Fuck the little guy "my guy" won

Sadly to some its all about politics not the people. Its about bashing the other guy until "my guy" wins after that the additude is fuck the common man because "my guy" won.

[yurbud]

174. she should not soften her rhetoric until the democrats toughen their action. You DLCers seem to

suggest that our only role in democracy as citizens is to vote and then go back to sleep until the next election.

[HughMoran]

176. Exactly

Some folks here are not here to promote political action at all. They are known as "wonks"

[yurbud]

179. I think that's giving them too much credit. Wonk implies familiarity with policy detail and concern

for outcomes.

This kind of thread is started by the kinder, gentler Karl Roves of the DLC.

[HughMoran]

180. Agreed

.

[cali]

187. One whinging note appears to be

all you're capable of- lying your ass off as you go from thread to thread accusing me of being aligned with the DLC.

[yurbud]

175. Do the POLLS support Cindy or the corporate dems who want to milk war? I think dems will do right

but people like Cindy and the rest of us need to keep the heat on partly to show our support if democrats plan to do the right thing, but also to hold their feet to the fire if they think they can shine us on.

[tabasco]

181. I've never used ignore until now.

Congrats. One down, 89,000 to go.

[JeremyWestenn]

182. I'm with you. I would not have played the same cards.

Had she played her cards right she could have been an anti-war voice and, being the mother of a dead soldier, could have been a person that next to no one could have taken heads on without being villified. Instead she went over the top, said things she shouldn't have, allied with a lot of people she shouldn't have, and as such the VAST mainstream of both parties don't take this women seriously and look at her as kinda crazy.

She shoulda played it like a politician and she coulda been unstoppable in the education of how this war was horribly handled, executed, and how we were misled with no intention of actually trying to prove ourselves before we went to war.

[yurbud]

183. which people did she ally with that you don't approve of?

[oblivious]

186. The elephant in the room: Cindy criticised Israeli policy.

Thus she must be marginalized.

Christopher Hitchens calls her hysterical, sinister.
http://www.slate.com/id/2124500/

Cathy Young, Boston Globe calls her "the Sheehan circus".
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/08/22/the_cindy_sheehan_you_dont_know/

"But her vicious rhetoric leaves open the possibility that she makes room at her altar of hatred for Jews, as well." - Ben Johnson, FrontPageMagazine.com
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=19117

Michelle Malkin on Fox News accused her of treason and said she bears some responsibility for other American deaths in Iraq.

Bill O'Reilly also called her a traitor.

James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal says "she has embraced a grotesque ideology that goes far beyond garden-variety Angry Left paranoia". He accuses her of "crackpot views" and says "her foul statements make her an embarrassment".
http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110007110

Powerline suggests she may be guilty of a hate crime:
"Cindy Sheehan: is she a poor, benighted woman unhinged and rendered irrational by grief, or is she a calculating, vicious anti-Semite and anti-American like the extremists with whom she associates?

David Howowitz and the small people at Little Green Footballs call her 'Moonbat'. Little Green Footballs also says she is 'unhinged'.

Newsmax calls her statements 'bizarre'.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/8/14/101150.shtml

David Duke agreed with one point she made, so she is lumped in the David Duke camp. Unbelievable.

[yurbud]

190. I didn't know that. I thought they mean Chavez, a pol who dares to use oil wealth to help

regular people

[Binka]

184. Played The Same Cards?

She isn't playing at ANYTHING sport she lost her son to this illegal and immoral war and you are talking about cards. Why don't you enlist?

[Tom Joad]

189. This apologetic for business as usual got a fraction of recs compared those appluading her action

got several times that.
DU... I think its for peace activists. Not thosse who support the status quo. Not the Rahm Emmauel fans, this man does not even have a public position on the war, that we can find from his website. He has said he only wants it better managed, that money has been wasted there.

Not one bit of concern about ending this insanity. No Dem mis"leader" should hold a press conference uninterrupted if they continue to support this immoral war.