Posted on 08/08/2005 3:36:09 PM PDT by kristinn
A year-old article in a small California newspaper suddenly became one of the hottest media stories in the country today, generating wildly different interpretations from supporters and detractors of the Iraq war. This afternoon, the newspaper posted a story on its Web site, along with its original story, which may only add fuel to the fire.
The dispute is inspired by the ongoing protest vigil by Cindy Sheehan, whose son was killed in Iraq last year. Sheehan, whose son Casey was an Army specialist, remains camped out near President Bush' ranch in Crawford, Texas, determined to get a meeting with the commander-in-chief.
Today, at a press briefing about Air Force One en route to New Mexico, reporters asked repeatedly about Sheehan's request. White House spokesman Trent Duffy suggested the meeting was unlikely, since the president met with her last year. "And he was glad to meet with her at that time," Duffy said. "We always mourn the loss of every life."
He also pointed out that the White House had sent two top officials out to meet with her this weekend, and said she "expressed on more than three occasions that she was very appreciative for them coming out."
But it is Sheehan's meeting with Bush last summer in Seattle--and an alleged change in her opinion of it--that sparked controversy earlier today.
At the time of her meeting with Bush in June 2004, Sheehan's hometown paper, the Vacaville Reporter, covered her reaction. As charges flew this afternoon, David Henson, author of the original story, told E&P this afternoon, “I stand by my full report as an accurate reflection of the Sheehans at the time of the interview. I wouldn't want to speculate about Ms. Sheehan's point of view. My article accurately reflected her position at the time.”
For months, Sheehan has strongly criticized the president on the war, adding that she was disappointed in his demeanor -- he allegedly acted like he was at a party -- and comments during her 10-minute meeting with him. This morning, The Drudge Report published quotes from Henson's Vacaville story (which at that time was no longer on the paper's site). This, Drudge suggested, showed that Sheehan had changed her account of that meeting radically.
Drudge quoted Sheehan saying at that time about Bush, “I now know he's sincere about wanting freedom for the Iraqis. I know he's sorry and feels some pain for our loss. And I know he's a man of faith.”
He also noted that Sheehan had taken comfort from meeting. “That was the gift the president gave us, the gift of happiness, of being together,” Sheehan said, referring to the benefit to her family.
But liberal Web sites quickly pointed out that the original story also revealed that Sheehan and her husband, Patrick, had debated before the meeting whether to ask pointed questions about the war and whether to vent frustration over their son's sacrifice. Ultimately, the Sheehans decided not to criticize Bush in the meeting.
"We haven't been happy with the way the war has been handled," Cindy said at that time. "The president has changed his reasons for being over there every time a reason is proven false or an objective reached."
In re-posting the original story on the paper's Web site, Editor Diane Barney said: "It's important that readers see the full context of the story, instead of just selected portions. We stand by the story as an accurate reflection of the Sheehan's take on the meeting at the time it was published.'”
I will never forget Alan Colmes, before we went to Iraq, pounding his little fist on his desk as he said something to the effect of: Is it WMD? Is it that we want to liberate the Iraqis? Is it to stop the torture chambers? Is it to bring democracy to the Middle East? Which is it? Make up your minds!
I remember screaming at the TV, "It's all of the above, you moron!"
After the media took the no WMD's line out of context of Kay's report, Colmes claimed the only pre-war reason given was WMD and now the conservatives are changing their stories.
Some conservatives say they like Alan Colmes because he's nice, and that's their right, but he's a slimy liar, and what's worse, his lies hurt the U.S.
ping
Disgrace is right...their only redemption would be...if they truly were a front for the CIA (As Saddam accused them of being pre Operation Iraqi Freedom) and the blatant Anti-Americanism of their International unit was merely a cover...but...I doubt it.
I'm just glad the POTUS is getting his hits in these days Energy Bill, Bolton Nomination...can't accuse him of being lame in this term given that he's only been in it 8 months.(I know that fanatical immigration people would disagree, but they should be patient.)
Cindy Sheehan is the Democrat's equivalent of a suicide bomber. In its simplest terms, she was brainwashed into strapping on a belt, getting out in front of the media...and blowing her credibility to shreds, hopefully spraying a little blood on the President.
All this for the greater glory of the left.
Even if she volunteered, that they would take advantage of a grief-stricken woman in this way is simply despicable.
I doff my hat to you.
Just like Nick Berg's dad, this is a person who hates our president more than the murdering bastards who killed their son.
Really? Cool! Did this happen on a FR thread? Does anyone have a link? Thanks!
"This poor lady needs to get some help and the people exploiting her need to be exposed".
This woman is neither poor, nor a lady. She sells herself for monetary and political gain. If one sells one's self, what does that make one?
Hint: It's not a garden implement!
LLS
Great job Kristinn!!
That woman is like a Leftist Stepford Wife...they just implant the Moveon talking points and send them out into the street.
It was Kristinn who called Drudge last night and told him about the article and her own web page that had the descriptions of the photos (the photos were removed)with her and the president.
I hate to criticize the woman. She's in deep pain, obviously. And, yes, she's going a bit nuts and blaming President Bush. This is politically unfair and also treasoness in some respects. On the other hand, if my son were killed like that, it might just blow my mind, too. Attack her politics but, not her personally.
She is more like an auto-tron....just wind her up and she will spew out nasty comments about our President and the Armed Forces. Someone needs to tell her to put a cork in it and STFU. I'm sick of these damned idiots spouting out lies on CNN and the NYT, and it is time for them to put up or shut up!!
"When will these people emerge from the pre-9-11 world they're stuck in where Saddam Hussein was to their way of thinking a great addition to the world community and where we didn't need to act to end the sources of instability and chaos in the Middle East that breed terrorism??"
When thier kids are dead...here on US soil...regularly...and, by that same token, when it is too late.
This story does, indeed, have legs.
Thanks for your great effort. I agree CNN is a disgrace, and while I sympathize with Cindy Sheehan for her loss, I find her actions disgraceful. Her hypocrisy regarding the President reveals much about her that is not admirable. She is certainly not honoring her sons' memory or what he obviously believed in. It is a VOLUNTEER army, and I read that he did not have to go on the mission in which he was killed, but he wanted to go. Her son was a hero, but it's a shame his mother is using his death to promote her own political ideology. If she wanted to honor her son, she could find a more honorable way to do so. Unfortunately, she doesn't seem to care that she's being dishonest and dishonorable.
Is Cindy Sheehan on Moveon.org's payroll?
Have any of the msm posted information on her conflicting opinions yet?
The internet...what a blessing.
Alan Colmes IS a slimey liar. And he has a lizard tongue. We have to 'mute' him to be able to stomach H&C.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.