Cindy Sheehan is a puppet and a nut

[KRC]

I don't understand why are you sharing this with us.  Do you think that is a bit out of bounds?

 

I don't really have an opinion on what she is doing apart from she ought to be able to have her protest and fade into black without being personally attacked like this.  For example, what would be behind the thinking that leads one (not you) to be enraged that she called the President a rotten so-and-so but applaud her being called or treated like a "B word in the Ditch"?  I think the leader of the free world is probably able to take a nasty jibe from a nobody like little Cindy Sheehan a little better than Cindy Sheehan will be able to handle mericless attacks from media superstar zillionaires from Limbaugh to Coulter.  Why don't hey pick on someone their own size? 

 

What is behind this massive mobilization of the republican attack machine against this woman?  Why is it so important to shred her to pieces?  "She's crazy, she's mean, she is a liar, she's nuts, she hates Bush, she is a tool of the left, she is a B word in a ditch."  Twenty-four seven. 

 

People who will excuse a President who took us to war with thousands dead based on WMD's that never existed have their panties in a bunch over an old woman in a tent.  Even if she is the biggest kook in Crawford, isn't this just a bit unseemly?

411507[/snapback]

 

 

Not that I condone what is said about her (because I do not), but what gives her immunity from criticism? If she is going to protest 24/7, then she is also open to criticism 24/7. People have the right to criticize, regardless of their position in life.

 

If Sheehan is going to blast the administration with the types of things she is saying, then defenders of the administration have the right to fight back.

[Ghost of BiB]

Not that I condone what is said about her (because I do not), but what gives her immunity from criticism? If she is going to protest 24/7, then she is also open to criticism 24/7. People have the right to criticize, regardless of their position in life.

 

If Sheehan is going to blast the administration with the types of things she is saying, then defenders of the administration have the right to fight back.

411524[/snapback]

 

Very well said, Ken. Good point. If you want the camera on you, especially politically, the street runs both ways.

[boomerjamhead]

I don't understand why are you sharing this with us.  Do you think that is a bit out of bounds?

 

I don't really have an opinion on what she is doing apart from she ought to be able to have her protest and fade into black without being personally attacked like this.

411507[/snapback]

 

She had her chance to do as much when she met the President for the first time. Why didn't she stay faded into the black when she had her chance?

[boomerjamhead]

I guess her Mom just had a stroke in LA and she's taking off.

 

Hope her Mom makes it.

[KD in CA]

RK, if you find yourself quoting Ann Coulter you need to step back man, seriously.  The claim of being balanced and a non-hypocrite you made in that thread started by Dr. K can't survive this Coulter quoting.  I won't begrudge you your opinions on Cindy Sheehan but really, Ann Coulter?

411466[/snapback]

 

 

It seems to me that he was quoting Sheehan. His comments were based on her statements. Coulter merely relayed Sheehan's quotes. Are you defending Sheehan's statements? Or are you suggesting Coulter invented the quotes? Or did you just take a shot at a journalist you don't like in lieu of having any retort to RkFast's comment?

[Ghost of BiB]

It seems to me that he was quoting Sheehan.  His comments were based on her statements.  Coulter merely relayed Sheehan's quotes.  Are you defending Sheehan's statements?  Or are you suggesting Coulter invented the quotes?  Or did you just take a shot at a journalist you don't like in lieu of having any retort to RkFast's comment?

411558[/snapback]

 

A. Coulter may definitely put on her spin, but one thing you have to respect is that she never fabricates. She's very careful to attribute sources, especially in her books.

[erynthered]

I don't understand why are you sharing this with us.  Do you think that is a bit out of bounds?

 

I don't really have an opinion on what she is doing apart from she ought to be able to have her protest and fade into black without being personally attacked like this.  For example, what would be behind the thinking that leads one (not you) to be enraged that she called the President a rotten so-and-so but applaud her being called or treated like a "B word in the Ditch"?  I think the leader of the free world is probably able to take a nasty jibe from a nobody like little Cindy Sheehan a little better than Cindy Sheehan will be able to handle mericless attacks from media superstar zillionaires from Limbaugh to Coulter.  Why don't hey pick on someone their own size? 

 

What is behind this massive mobilization of the republican attack machine against this woman?  Why is it so important to shred her to pieces?  "She's crazy, she's mean, she is a liar, she's nuts, she hates Bush, she is a tool of the left, she is a B word in a ditch."  Twenty-four seven. 

 

People who will excuse a President who took us to war with thousands dead based on WMD's that never existed have their panties in a bunch over an old woman in a tent.  Even if she is the biggest kook in Crawford, isn't this just a bit unseemly?

411507[/snapback]

 

 

Its another example of how far out of bounds the media has taken this Mick. Its part of the story. While I dont like it either, its whats new.

 

 

And Boom, I'm with you. I heard that on the radio, on my way home. That woman has gone through enough. Getting ripped apart by some fringe fractions that never had her best interests at heart, and losing her son.

[Chef Jim]

I think this has been brought up before. But where is this type of outrage, demands, attention on the number of our citizens being killed by our own citizens. Take a trip to Compton some day. Oh that's right.............they're black.

[Ghost of BiB]

I think this has been brought up before.  But where is this type of outrage, demands, attention on the number of our citizens being killed by our own citizens.  Take a trip to Compton some day.  Oh that's right.............they're black. 

411576[/snapback]

 

They just made the per-capita record, didn't they? I'm still stunned that no one ever comments on the analogies between gang violence and terrorism, especially in so far as recruitment. In my simple Polish mind, there is little difference.

[Chef Jim]

They just made the per-capita record, didn't they? I'm still stunned that no one ever comments on the analogies between gang violence and terrorism, especially in so far as recruitment. In my simple Polish mind, there is little difference.

411579[/snapback]

 

Well they're (the terrorists) are recruiting local black muslims in prison. They arrested a couple recently who had plans to shoot up a National Guard recruitment center on Sept 11th. If that's the terrorist's new MO they need brighter guys. Sept 11th falls on a Sunday and the recruitment center has been closed for quite sometime.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

I'm still stunned that no one ever comments on the analogies between gang violence and terrorism, especially in so far as recruitment. In my simple Polish mind, there is little difference.

411579[/snapback]

 

Well, yeah...but we've got those MS-13 lunatics to deal with in this area, so we're aware of it.

[erynthered]

They just made the per-capita record, didn't they? I'm still stunned that no one ever comments on the analogies between gang violence and terrorism, especially in so far as recruitment. In my simple Polish mind, there is little difference.

411579[/snapback]

 

 

Since when is there a simple Polish mind?

 

 

 

 

Back on track, you're right, but the media wouldnt be able to sell the advertising time, sorry. Non-story.

[Wacka]

Her surviving son has been begging her to come home. Why didn't she do it then? Is her mother more importnt than her son?

[Mickey]

Not that I condone what is said about her (because I do not), but what gives her immunity from criticism? If she is going to protest 24/7, then she is also open to criticism 24/7. People have the right to criticize, regardless of their position in life.

 

If Sheehan is going to blast the administration with the types of things she is saying, then defenders of the administration have the right to fight back.

411524[/snapback]

I agree with that but I'm not talking about rights. Its piling on, an unequal contest between a nobody and every right wing talking head from Limbaugh to Coulter.

 

What is interesting to me is why this anti-war, anti-Bush protester, as opposed to many, many others, has drawn so much fire. My own feeling is that there are those on the right who are acutely aware that public support for the war is at a low. Anxiety on the issue is high, the news is slow and then along comes this lady in a tent. The fact that the media and every left wing talking head has trumpeted her as a genuine martyr is just another sign that public opinion may be shifting. An emboldened left opposes the war with more vigor and a worried right reacts in hyperdrive.

 

I don't know, just a theory. It just seems like an awful lot over an awful little.

[Mickey]

A. Coulter may definitely put on her spin, but one thing you have to respect is that she never fabricates. She's very careful to attribute sources, especially in her books.

411567[/snapback]

Your being sarcastic, right?

[Adam]

My heart goes out to anyone who lost a family member in battle, however, I will ignore her hysterical spew

[SilverNRed]

I agree with that but I'm not talking about rights.  Its piling on, an unequal contest between a nobody and every right wing talking head from Limbaugh to Coulter. 

411672[/snapback]

Get real. She's backed by every "name" in the George Soros/Michael Moore wing of the Democratic party. They're paying for her PR rep!

 

And every major "mainstream" news outlet is covering her several hours a day. I tried flipping through the cable news channels last night and couldn't get away from her. The new buzz word is that she represents the "tipping point" in the Iraq War. Both CNN and MSNBC used that term. Why? I don't know! Probably because it's a good way to present a story and make a meaningless story seem meaningful.

 

I can't imagine anyone trying to frame her as this "nobody" trying to take on the big names on the Right. She has plenty of powerful friends and people who want to broadcast her.

[VABills]

Don't worry folks, forces have shut her up for now. Seems someone doesn't seem to like her message and the angels have been sent to take care of the situation.

 

I feel sorry for her family, but she is doing nothing be being a mouthpiece and spreading hatred.

 

edit: I wonder if Casey didn't go to ask the power that be to shut her down. This was the most expeditious way.

[Mickey]

It seems to me that he was quoting Sheehan.  His comments were based on her statements.  Coulter merely relayed Sheehan's quotes.  Are you defending Sheehan's statements?  Or are you suggesting Coulter invented the quotes?  Or did you just take a shot at a journalist you don't like in lieu of having any retort to RkFast's comment?

411558[/snapback]

She "merely relayed" Sheehan's quotes? First, she puts Sheehan's words in the mouths of every democrat in the country when she says "Sheehan shows us what Democrats would say..." Sorry but that is pure crap and if you want to lap it up, fine, but the fact is no one takes this harpie seriously outside of the extreme right. In another thread, RK went on about how the people on the board on the right are balanced and see the hypocrisy of politicians while those on the left are all dedicated partisans, blind to the shortcomings of their own party. I see that bit of self congratulatory hype as just a smidge over the top when, in the same day, he is quoting Ann Coulter.

 

As for Coulter's accuracy, here is what Sheehan said, in context, with Coulter's lift in bold:

 

"I’m going all over the country telling moms: “This country is not worth dying for. If we’re attacked, we would all go out. We’d all take whatever we had. I’d take my rolling pin and I’d beat the attackers over the head with it. But we were not attacked by Iraq."

 

Seems to me she is willing to die for the country if its attacked but not in a war like this one. Why? Because we weren't attacked. Agree with her or not, fact is Coulter's lift was misleading.

 

Another example, here is what Sheehan said:

 

"America has been killing people, like my sister over here says, since we first stepped on this continent..."

 

Here is Coulter's quote, or rather, misquote:

 

"America has been killing people on this continent since it was started"

 

First off, Sheehan is just agreeing with what someone else said. Second, Coulter got the quote wrong and left out the reference to another person. Third, ask Native Americans, lynching victims, etc. etc. about whether there is some truth to the ideat that since Eurpoeans stepped on this continent, there has been a lot of killing.

 

Another, here is what Sheehan said:

 

"I would never have let him go and try and defend this morally repugnant system we have. The people are good, the system is morally repugnant."

 

What Coulter says, first cutting in her own words and then adding Sheehan's:

 

"She calls the U.S. government a 'morally repugnant system'..."

 

Problem is, Sheehan didn't say "government". She said "system", Coulter guesses that she must mean "government" so I guess we just have to trust Coulter's mind reading abilitites. She makes it sound as if Sheehan thinks democracy and constitutional government are "repugnant". That is simply nonsense. In the same speech, Sheehan complains that Congress abrogated their responsibilty when it gave Bush a vote to go to war without a declaration of war. She thinks they undermined the constitution in doing so and, in my judgment, the "morally repugnant system she deplores" is not the government we were all raised on, democracy, but what the governement has become. This very sentiment has been expressed by the right as well in their endless anti-government rants over the years. Again, by removing context, cutting and pasting and adding her own spin, Coulter manages to twist Sheehan into some sort of Mama Bin Laden.

 

That doesn't mean that Sheehan's motives and all couldn't have been perfectly skewered using accurate quotes but that is Ann Coulter. The truth about Sheehan is probably enough to discredit her position but that isn't enough for the Ann Coulters of the world, they have to make it personal and turn her into something she simply is not.

 

Enough already.

[Mickey]

Don't worry folks, forces have shut her up for now.  Seems someone doesn't seem to like her message and the angels have been sent to take care of the situation. 

 

I feel sorry for her family, but she is doing nothing be being a mouthpiece and spreading hatred.

 

edit:  I wonder if Casey didn't go to ask the power that be to shut her down.  This was the most expeditious way.

411695[/snapback]

I wonder if maybe God killed Casey so that she would be motivated to protest the war in precisely the way that she did. Maybe Casey asked God to shut her down to keep her from being destroyed by the raving Coulters and Limbaughs of the world. Maybe the goal was to spare her that, not shut her up. Misca, her mother, her aging mother had a stroke. So maybe Casey asked God to off his own Grandmother?

 

Man, this woman really, really got to you guys didn't she? Here you are seeing divine intervention in finally getting her off the stage. Was she so dangerous that we needed God himself to help us out? I didn't realize the right was this jittery over the war.

[Reuben Gant]

The new buzz word is that she represents the "tipping point" in the Iraq War.  Both CNN and MSNBC used that term.  Why?  I don't know!  Probably because it's a good way to present a story and make a meaningless story seem meaningful.

 

411693[/snapback]

I was wondering when they were going to start using that phrase "tipping point," it may very well prove to be, but I doubt it. I was looking at Zogby who states:

 

"Only 38 per cent give the president a positive rating for handling it (Iraq). And, today, the linkage between Iraq and the war on terrorism that has worked for Mr Bush in the past is taking its toll. Barely a majority give the president positive marks for handling the war on terrorism - down from 66 per cent when he was re-elected in 2004. " Aug 10,2005

 

But this doesn't represent a widespread anti-war movement as much as Bush's failure to clearly articulate what needs to be accomplished and how long it will take. Another social convention that prevents the "tipping point" is that currently the military and the celebration of military values is seen as the remedy for the things plaguing the country. (e.g. Terrorism, selfishness, greed, lack of sacrifice)

 

If I am thinking like a marketing guy, I am betting against a widespread anti-war movement developing from this (although I do believe there is long overdue, nationwide discussion needed for the role of the military in this country, but that is another thread)

[Wacka]

I'll say it again. you libs just don't get it.

 

 

Keep holding hands and singing kumbayah, it just gives the islamofascists an easier target when the shoot you or blow you up.

 

 

The libs remind me of some of the characters in the movie "Mars Attacks!"

They're on the top of a hotel in Vegas with signs welcomming the martians. The martians laugh and blow them to smithereens.

[SilverNRed]

The libs remind me of some of the characters in  the movie "Mars Attacks!"

They're on the top of a hotel in Vegas with signs welcomming the martians. The martians laugh  and blow them to smithereens.

411797[/snapback]

I'm pretty sure you just combined Mars Attacks and Independence Day into one movie there.

 

Independence Day had the nutjobs with signs standing on buildings in Los Angeles.

 

Mars Attacks had all the aliens laughing while they killed people and took place mainly in Las Vegas.

 

In retrospect, both movies sucked.

[RkFast]

She "merely relayed" Sheehan's quotes?  First, she puts Sheehan's words in the mouths of every democrat in the country when she says "Sheehan shows us what Democrats would say..."  Sorry but that is pure crap and if you want to lap it up, fine, but the fact is no one takes this harpie seriously outside of the extreme right.  In another thread, RK went on about how the people on the board on the right are balanced and see the hypocrisy of politicians while those on the left are all dedicated partisans, blind to the shortcomings of their own party.  I see that bit of self congratulatory hype as just a smidge over the top when, in the same day, he is quoting Ann Coulter.

 

As for Coulter's accuracy, here is what Sheehan said, in context, with Coulter's lift in bold:

 

"I’m going all over the country telling moms: “This country is not worth dying for. If we’re attacked, we would all go out. We’d all take whatever we had. I’d take my rolling pin and I’d beat the attackers over the head with it. But we were not attacked by Iraq."

 

Seems to me she is willing to die for the country if its attacked but not in a war like this one.  Why? Because we weren't attacked.  Agree with her or not, fact is Coulter's lift was misleading.

 

Another example, here is what Sheehan said:

 

"America has been killing people, like my sister over here says, since we first stepped on this continent..."

 

Here is Coulter's quote, or rather, misquote:

 

"America has been killing people on this continent since it was started"

 

First off, Sheehan is just agreeing with what someone else said.  Second, Coulter got the quote wrong and left out the reference to another person.  Third, ask Native Americans, lynching victims, etc. etc. about whether there is some truth to the ideat that since Eurpoeans stepped on this continent, there has been a lot of killing.

 

Another, here is what Sheehan said:

 

"I would never have let him go and try and defend this morally repugnant system we have. The people are good, the system is morally repugnant."

 

What Coulter says, first cutting in her own words and then adding Sheehan's:

 

"She calls the U.S. government a 'morally repugnant system'..."

 

Problem is, Sheehan didn't say "government".  She said "system", Coulter guesses that she must mean "government" so I guess we just have to trust Coulter's mind reading abilitites.  She makes it sound as if Sheehan thinks democracy and constitutional government are "repugnant".  That is simply nonsense.  In the same speech, Sheehan complains that Congress abrogated their responsibilty when it gave Bush a vote to go to war without a declaration of war.  She thinks they undermined the constitution in doing so and, in my judgment, the "morally repugnant system she deplores" is not the government we were all raised on, democracy, but what the governement has become.  This very sentiment has been expressed by the right as well in their endless anti-government rants over the years.  Again, by removing context, cutting and pasting and adding her own spin, Coulter manages to twist Sheehan into some sort of Mama Bin Laden.

 

That doesn't mean that Sheehan's motives and all couldn't have been perfectly skewered using accurate quotes but that is Ann Coulter.  The truth about Sheehan is probably enough to discredit her position but that isn't enough for the Ann Coulters of the world, they have to make it personal and turn her into something she simply is not.

 

Enough already.

411755[/snapback]

 

Mick...as BiB said, I brought up Coulter's name for the sole purpose of crediting my source. Board mods here and elsewhere tend to get a bit upset if you dont.

 

The quotes are all Sheehan's. You want to try and "spin" away her comments, knock yourself out. But the fact is that she is a fraud. She is NOT some poor grieving mom who rolled up to Bush's front door with a simple plea. She is a radical anti-war protester who is, and has been for some time now, organized and bankrolled by the Left who just happens to have the clout of having a son who fought and died in Iraq, giving her words more weight. Outside of that, she's Micheal Moore...or your local loudmouth, irrational protester. And why should Bush meet with that?

[KRC]

Get real.  She's backed by every "name" in the George Soros/Michael Moore wing of the Democratic party.  They're paying for her PR rep! 

 

And every major "mainstream" news outlet is covering her several hours a day.  I tried flipping through the cable news channels last night and couldn't get away from her.  The new buzz word is that she represents the "tipping point" in the Iraq War.  Both CNN and MSNBC used that term.  Why?  I don't know!  Probably because it's a good way to present a story and make a meaningless story seem meaningful.

 

I can't imagine anyone trying to frame her as this "nobody" trying to take on the big names on the Right.  She has plenty of powerful friends and people who want to broadcast her.

411693[/snapback]

 

Excellent point. Sheehan has a larger audience then Limbaugh. She can get her message out to more people than Limbaugh, but yet Limbaugh is the bad guy because he dares to criticize someone. While she may be a "nobody," the machine behind her is not.

 

Like Paul said: if you venture into politics on the scale that Sheehan has to blast the administration, you can't then complain that people are criticizing you. That would be the height of hypocrisy.

[KRC]

I agree with that but I'm not talking about rights.  Its piling on, an unequal contest between a nobody and every right wing talking head from Limbaugh to Coulter. 

411672[/snapback]

 

And the left is not "piling on" with her message? As I said in another post, she has a larger audience than Limabugh, Coulter and Hannity combined. To say that it is an unfair contest is just flat-out wrong.

 

Again, why should she receive a free pass to say anything without allowing dissent to her accusations?

[Mickey]

Excellent point. Sheehan has a larger audience then Limbaugh. She can get her message out to more people than Limbaugh, but yet Limbaugh is the bad guy because he dares to criticize someone. While she may be a "nobody," the machine behind her is not.

 

Like Paul said: if you venture into politics on the scale that Sheehan has to blast the administration, you can't then complain that people are criticizing you. That would be the height of hypocrisy.

411922[/snapback]

She has a larger audience than the President of the United States, Limbaugh, Coulter, Hannity, O'Reilly, Malkin, etc, etc, etc combined? Wow, I had no idea she was so all powerful.

 

Apart from whether its piling on or not, the huge reaction she has inspired I think is an indication of something larger in terms of the public's concerns about the war and our leaders. That is what I am taking from the incident. The left is getting a little bolder on the war and the right is starting to worry about the 2006 elections if the war keeps going this way. I guess with republicans themselves being more critical of the President as the 2006 elections cycle approaches and the war dragging on, it shouldn't come as a surprise to see some democrats being even more critical as well.

 

I wonder what the next media circus will be. From the Jackson trial to Cindy Sheehan, it has been a long summer.

[Mickey]

I was wondering when they were going to start using that phrase "tipping point," it may very well prove to be, but I doubt it. I was looking at Zogby who states:

 

"Only 38 per cent give the president a positive rating for handling it (Iraq). And, today, the linkage between Iraq and the war on terrorism that has worked for Mr Bush in the past is taking its toll. Barely a majority give the president positive marks for handling the war on terrorism - down from 66 per cent when he was re-elected in 2004. " Aug 10,2005

 

But this doesn't represent a  widespread anti-war movement as much as Bush's failure to clearly articulate what needs to be accomplished and how long it will take. Another social convention that prevents the "tipping point" is that currently the military and the celebration of military values  is seen as the remedy for the things plaguing the country. (e.g. Terrorism, selfishness, greed,  lack of sacrifice)

 

If I am thinking like a marketing guy, I am betting against a widespread anti-war movement developing from this (although I do believe there is long overdue, nationwide discussion needed for the role of the military in this country, but that is another thread)

411772[/snapback]

 

Support for the war is at a low point but I don't think Cindy Sheehan is responsible. Reality is accomplishing that. She hasn't "tipped" anything. The reaction to her however is, I think, an indication of some real concern on the right that they are vulnerable on this issue and that public support could be slipping away. It could just be a temporary shift in opinion that will reverse itself with some good news, only time will tell.

[KRC]

She has a larger audience than the President of the United States, Limbaugh, Coulter, Hannity, O'Reilly, Malkin, etc, etc, etc combined?  Wow, I had no idea she was so all powerful.

411929[/snapback]

 

When she is covered to the extent that she is covered in the media, yes. How many newspapers/media outlets pick up what Limbaugh/Coulter/Hannity says on a daily basis. Compare that to the non-stop coverage Sheehan has received in all media outlets (TV, radio, web, newspapers, magazines, etc). A commanding audience fueled by the left and anti-war organizations.

 

The non-stop coverage of her has made her audience bigger than her opposition.

[Mickey]

Mick...as BiB said, I brought up Coulter's name for the sole purpose of crediting my source. Board mods here and elsewhere tend to get a bit upset if you dont.

 

The quotes are all Sheehan's. You want to try and "spin" away her comments, knock yourself out. But the fact is that she is a fraud. She is NOT some poor grieving mom who rolled up to Bush's front door with a simple plea. She is a radical anti-war protester who is, and has been for some time now, organized and bankrolled by the Left who just happens to have the clout of having a son who fought and died in Iraq, giving her words more weight. Outside of that, she's Micheal Moore...or your local loudmouth, irrational protester. And why should Bush meet with that?

411914[/snapback]

I don't think Coulter quoted her honestly, I wasn't accusing you of misquoting Coulter. What I did, was take Coulter's quotes and Sheehan's name and just googled them and quickly got a transcript of what she actually said. I wasn't surprised to see a different picture than the one Coulter painted. That doesn't mean, based on her actual words, even in context, that she couldn't be discredited on some levels.

 

I think "anti-war protester whose son died in the war" is an accurate description of her, even "dedicated anti-war protester" would do. Coulter however was going much further than that along the lines of the "B word in a ditch" thing. To me that is the difference between legit, even dead-on, criticism and hysterical, lying, fire eating crapola.

 

What can really be damaging about that Coulter or Moore like approach is that it can remove any possibility of a civil discussion. If you are a person who agrees with the basic anti-war message of Cindy Sheehan, how do you have a civil discussion with someone who is calling her a "B word in a ditch"? By the same token, if you support the President, how do you have a civil discussion with someone who calls him "murdering idiot" or some other slam?

[KRC]

What can really be damaging about that Coulter or Moore like approach is that it can remove any possibility of a civil discussion.  If you are a person who agrees with the basic anti-war message of Cindy Sheehan, how do you have a civil discussion with someone who is calling her a "B word in a ditch"?  By the same token, if you support the President, how do you have a civil discussion with someone who calls him "murdering idiot" or some other slam?

411941[/snapback]

 

Well said, Mick.

[Mickey]

When she is covered to the extent that she is covered in the media, yes. How many newspapers/media outlets pick up what Limbaugh/Coulter/Hannity says on a daily basis. Compare that to the non-stop coverage Sheehan has received in all media outlets (TV, radio, web, newspapers, magazines, etc). A commanding audience fueled by the left and anti-war organizations.

 

The non-stop coverage of her has made her audience bigger than her opposition.

411938[/snapback]

Actually I read a piece today that was critical of how the mainstream media was repeating the criticisms of her from the far right.

 

Again, what I find interesting is not that she is being attacked or really whether those attacks or on the mark, over heated or whatever. That she has become such a lightning rod even if a short lived one, I think, is indicative of something larger. She is seen as a pretty major threat given the reaction all around.

[KRC]

Actually I read a piece today that was critical of how the mainstream media was repeating the criticisms of her from the far right. 

 

Again, what I find interesting is not that she is being attacked or really whether those attacks or on the mark, over heated or whatever.  That she has become such a lightning rod even if a short lived one,  I think, is indicative of something larger.  She is seen as a pretty major threat given the reaction all around.

411948[/snapback]

 

She is just a pawn in this, unfortunately. The main problem is the left-wing machine behind her. That is why the right is working so hard on his. There are key elections next year and the war (and its perception in the public's eye) will be crucial in the campaigning.

[PastaJoe]

Support for the war is at a low point but I don't think Cindy Sheehan is responsible.  Reality is accomplishing that.  She hasn't "tipped" anything.  The reaction to her however is, I think, an indication of some real concern on the right that they are vulnerable on this issue and that public support could be slipping away.  It could just be a temporary shift in opinion that will reverse itself with some good news, only time will tell.

411931[/snapback]

 

Well said. She is just the tip of the iceberg, and is currently getting the media attention. But there are other Gold Star mothers with her, as well as others who are now stepping forward and speaking to the media, who have been emboldened by Sheehan's courage. There are alot of people who opposed this unnecessary invasion, and a majority of Americans now think it was a mistake, but were afraid to speak up because they would be wrongfully accused of being anti-American and aiding the enemy. But now that they see others stepping forward, and a continued lack of security in Iraq at the expense of our soldiers lives, they are coming forward. It may be too late to pull out as Sheehan would like, but at the very least we must hold those who advocated this invasion accountable where possible in future elections.

[Reuben Gant]

It may be too late to pull out as Sheehan would like, but at the very least we must hold those who advocated this invasion accountable where possible in future elections.

412148[/snapback]

The political right is losing control of the narrative they created for this war.

I would describe the sentiments of most as "disillusionment" rather than "anti-war."

 

BTW if anyone is interested Orbis Foreign Policy Reseach Institute put this arcticle on US Casualties in the public domain:

 

Fatalities in Iraq over 2 years PDF 16 pp.

[fisheralum]

Get real.  She's backed by every "name" in the George Soros/Michael Moore wing of the Democratic party.  They're paying for her PR rep! 

 

And every major "mainstream" news outlet is covering her several hours a day.  I tried flipping through the cable news channels last night and couldn't get away from her.  The new buzz word is that she represents the "tipping point" in the Iraq War.  Both CNN and MSNBC used that term.  Why?  I don't know!  Probably because it's a good way to present a story and make a meaningless story seem meaningful.

 

I can't imagine anyone trying to frame her as this "nobody" trying to take on the big names on the Right.  She has plenty of powerful friends and people who want to broadcast her.

411693[/snapback]

 

In fact, MOVE ON dot ORG took out two full pages in the local Waco Tribune Herald with quotes from people all over the country supporting her, which would have had to take a little bit of time to assemble, or was already ready to go. This thing is just another choreographed political stunt

[RkFast]

I don't think Coulter quoted her honestly, I wasn't accusing you of misquoting Coulter.  What I did, was take Coulter's quotes and Sheehan's name and just googled them and quickly got a transcript of what she actually said.  I wasn't surprised to see a different picture than the one Coulter painted.  That doesn't mean, based on her actual words, even in context, that she couldn't be discredited on some levels.

 

I think "anti-war protester whose son died in the war" is an accurate description of her, even "dedicated anti-war protester" would do.  Coulter however was going much further than that along the lines of the "B word in a ditch" thing.  To me that is the difference between legit, even dead-on, criticism and hysterical, lying, fire eating crapola. 

 

What can really be damaging about that Coulter or Moore like approach is that it can remove any possibility of a civil discussion.  If you are a person who agrees with the basic anti-war message of Cindy Sheehan, how do you have a civil discussion with someone who is calling her a "B word in a ditch"?  By the same token, if you support the President, how do you have a civil discussion with someone who calls him "murdering idiot" or some other slam?

411941[/snapback]

 

Well said. Those are the "red meat" people and I used red meat to feed folks who prefer vegetarian. Bad move. But the point remains. Her rhetoric is outlandish....way over the top. She's not some poor Mom who lost her son. She's much more. I think fisheralum just said it best..."This thing is just another choreographed political stunt." From the pre-fab "protest kits" Moveon.org is handing out in support, to the PR agency thats been paid for by her backers, right down to her clothes....the straw hat and loose-fitting t-shirt to make her look just like "poor mom from down the street." Its all a stunt.

[Reuben Gant]

Well said. Those are the "red meat" people and I used red meat to feed folks who prefer vegetarian. Bad move. But the point remains. Her rhetoric is outlandish....way over the top. She's not some poor Mom who lost her son. She's much more. I think fisheralum just said it best..."This thing is just another choreographed political stunt." From the pre-fab "protest kits" Moveon.org is handing out in support, to the PR agency thats been paid for by her backers, right down to her clothes....the straw hat and loose-fitting t-shirt to make her look just like "poor mom from down the street." Its all a stunt.

412236[/snapback]

The Nation magazine profiled Cindy Sheehan as early as March 2005.

To characterize her protest as spontaneous is indeed misleading. This was done with forethought to the publicity it would generate.

[erynthered]

The Nation magazine profiled Cindy Sheehan as early as March 2005. 

To characterize her protest as spontaneous is indeed misleading. This was done with forethought to the publicity it would generate.

412293[/snapback]

 

 

 

<gasp> You mean she tricked the media?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Reuben Gant]

<gasp> You mean she tricked the media?

412309[/snapback]

Naaa, but the media does have a tendency to frame their stories in a way that

makes it look like fresh journalism. Covering one person is always easier than covering a movement, e.g. much more broadcast journalism is devoted to the president than what happens in congress. Just a limitation of the broadcast format.