The savaging of Cindy Sheehan (FR mentioned)

"Nevertheless, I honor her son's sacrifice. What she doesn't realize is that he died to protect her right to make a fool of herself"

Very much agreed. Too bad she doesn't honor his sacrifice. And yes, I feel deeply for her loss, and can only imagine it.

However, plenty of other American mothers have experienced the same and they do HONOR their sons and daughters for the sacrifice. They don't spit on it the way Ms. Shehan is doing. How sad.

Thanks, "somewhat" short and concise. :)

Good rant!

Bill O'Reilly says she's a tool of "far left elements."

He was being kind...she is an attention seeker...using her own son's combat death to promote 'Cindy'...

In my own experience I have seen a number of mom's who seemed to revel in the troubles their families get into..many times they are the driving force of that trouble and are able then to market it to friends, neighbors, the community to feel sorry for them or to make provisions for them in one way or another..

Cindy has been able to parlay her sons death into a really big 'Look at Me" adventure..

The left naturally uses any and all they can...the same way John Kerry used disgruntled combat vets of his day to promote himself..the anti war agenda is simply a vehicle to promote anyone who latches on for the ride..Marxists,Muslims,Greenies,PETAS,any one with dot com group looking for funds..

They all wave a pretty flag...but the are ALL every man jack of them..about the Green Party...the REAL Green Party...

The US Dollar...

imo imo

Europe is in grave danger, but there is cause for hope: the British reaction to the London bombings is heartening; and France and Germany seem poised to elect conservative governments at their next elections.

Sheehan is a fraud and a fake.

I have no sympathy for her loss anymore.

She is mugging for the cameras and every shot is posed.

What the left always forgets is that MCCARTHY WAS RIGHT!

Sheehan has earned our contempt.

One thing that Sheenan and her posse haven't given much thought to is that while our culture pretty much gives a lot of sympathy and leeway to sympathetic people, protracted 'woe is me' acts tend to wear very thin, very quickly.

Mrs. Holloway-Twitty is a recent example. Basically a sympathetic person caught in a sympathetic situation, in just about two months she went from poster-mom to pest & nuisence that people have grown tired of. That's not to say her situation is any less sympathetic: it's just that she has become less sympathetic.

You're very generous to her.

I think her "grief" has moved to a new level, that of self-absorbtion. She isn't the only mother that's lost a child. Her son chose his path. She won't move past this until she stops being rewarded for her behavior. She should honor his decision and that would honor him. She's trying to get something for herself but she's only diminishing herself.

She should be home with her other children.

That's so true.

I guess he's been reading the site and just had to give us honorable mention.

LOL

Sheenan's 'woe is me' act is much more pronounced than Mrs H-T's. She seems to have that perpetual droopy face that's only really seen on the clinically depressed, or the insane.

That's why I say she has cracked - I doubt she even knows what she is saying anymore, except she enjoys being goaded on by her new friends.

This won't end very well. I see a full blown breakdown in her future.

They have a lot of hard work ahead to come out of socialism. And we have a lot of hard work to keep from that path.

My concern now is that it makes the whole conservative movement look bad to read some of the hate-filled posts they come up with. How can we expect to win people on the fence to the cause of conservatism when all we do is spew hateful and harsh judgemental public statements? That's what the left has been so masterful at.

Don't worry. People in the news do things that make me furious, but I try my best to tone down my rhetoric when discussing them. I did fall into that trap once or even several times, and will make every effort not to do so again, even though I loathe that (now) very public person and those connected to that person and a few others.

There are lines I just do not like to cross, especially on a public forum. I probably shouldn't even post on this forum because I'm not hateful enough when I'm with the general concensus. Then I end up getting trashed. Sometimes I dissent for one reason or another. Then I end up getting trashed.

I talk to people on the right and on the left. The minute the trashing and name-calling starts, the dialogue is poisoned and it's over for both parties. If civility can be maintained, sometimes you can find some common ground with people and respect them even though you don't agree with them.

Evermost in my mind lately is "As ye judge, so shall ye be judged." That includes what we say about other people even if we hide behind a screen name. The big guy knows who and where we are and is taking notes.

I STRONGLY favor the former policy of keeping the processing of remains private until the family takes custody. Then the family can decide how much it values dignity, and how much it values publicity. If a family wants to invite the press to take pictures of their dead child's casket (or body, for that matter), let'em. But don't impose that choice on some other family.

EMAIL :

Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2005 1:00 PM ET

Subject: "This country is not worth dying for." -- Cindy Sheehan
--

"This country is not worth dying for."
-- Cindy Sheehan

--

PLEASE FORWARD THIS ON ASAP!

- good - accurate links & honest sources -

--

FReeper Phil Dragoo - from NM - emailed me a Font Page Mag article
linking Cindy Sheehan to convicted NYC defense attorney for Al Qaeda - Lynn Stewart & convicted cop killer Mumia Abu-Jamal.

--

Cindy Sheehan's husband has left her over her anti-American activities - and all of her family has joined in a letter decrying her activities and comments to the media.

Cindy Sheenan told MSNBC TV host Keith Obermann that she prefers that President GW Bush does not meet or talk with her now - as she feels it would ruin her Crawford, Texas showboating.......

!!!!!

Here's the live exchange on MSNBC :

KEITH OLBERMANN: "The nature of the media coverage you're getting
now, the response from other families of soldiers killed in Iraq, all of that, from the perspective of your protest there, in a way, isn't it
really better if President Bush doesn't meet with you?"

CINDY SHEEHAN: "I would think so, yes. I think it's great.

-- And if he would come out right now, it would really defuse the
momentum, and I don't want to give them any hints. --

And I think that's something they've probably already thought about.

But, you know, but we're here. We're committed. We're staying the
whole month of August, and then we're moving to Washington, D.C.

And we're going to have a 24-hour vigil on his front lawn to keep the pressure on.

The pressure is there. Sixty-two percent of Americans want our troops home. And this is giving them a voice to stand up and be counted and say, You know, we want our country back, and we want our troops home."

?????

"....diffuse the momentum?"

?????

So, it was really never about a "second meeting", right?

Never really about grief, correct?
There are more families out there
that have lost loved ones, and they do not share the leftist, "antiwar" politics of communists like Michael Moore, Medea Benjamin and Code Pink and communist fronts like the Fenton Communications, Tides Foundation, and George Soros, etc.

They also don't have the luxury to camp out for an entire month in Texas because most of them do something that the majority of professional protesters never do: They work.

They hold down jobs.

Ahaaaaaaa! :

http://www.joetrippi.com/files/cindy-call-081005.wav

A Texas radio talk show host has now been getting death threats from Cindy Sheehan's "supporters" - but has set up counter-protests around
Sheehan's crazy Muslims, La Raza, MoveOn.org, A.N.S.W.E.R., ACLU, CPUSA traitors -

EXCERPT FROM "FPM" ARTICLE :

--(URL link to full article at end of page)--

-- Cindy Sheehan followed this act.

-- Wearing a sweatshirt advertising the website for United for Peace and Justice, (confessed Communist group) Sheehan was interviewed outside just before the meeting by an ABC-TV news reporter. Sheehan said then that military recruiters should not be allowed on college campuses, maintaining they trick naïve 18-year-olds with offers of money and scholarships.

Tragically, Cindy Sheehan lost her son Casey who was in the Army and was killed two weeks after arriving in Iraq.

She claimed he was promised a job as a chaplain's assistant although once in the service was placed in a combat role and killed, certainly a moving story - one she exploits to promote venomous anti-Americanism.

"George Bush and his neo-conservatives killed my son," she said tearing up a bit.

"America has been killing people on this continent since it was
started." (in 1776?)

"This country is not worth dying for."
-- Cindy Sheehan

Sheehan said she considered Lynne Stewart (the WTC-1993 Al Qaeda defense attorney - now convicted of passing on terrorist acttack orders to OBL & others) her Atticus Finch, the lawyer who defended an innocent Black man accused of rape in the book and film "To Kill A Mockingbird."

"They're not waging a War on Terror but a War of Terror," she said.

"The biggest terrorist is George W. Bush." She claimed "it costs $66,000 to recruit one soldier, not including training, and $49,000 a year to house a prisoner, yet only $6,000 per year is spent to educate a child in California.

-- (Recruiting costs are actually $15,000 per soldier, the cost of
housing a prisoner in California for one year is $26,000.)

-- Sheehan continued, "9/11 was Pearl Harbor for the neo-conservatives'
agenda" and declared the U.S. government a "morally repugnant system."

Then she raged:

"We have no Constitution."

"We're the only country with no checks and balances."

"We want our country back if we have to impeach George Bush down to the person who picks up the dog sh-t in Washington!"

"Let George Bush send his two little party animals to die in Iraq. It's OK for Israel to have nuclear weapons but we are waging nuclear war in Iraq, we have contaminated the entire country."

"It's not OK for Syria to be in Lebanon. Hypocrites! But Israel can occupy Palestine? Stop the slaughter!"

(Anti-Israel & Anti-Semite - Pro-Islamic)

-- While one might dismiss some of Sheehan's hyperbole due to grief over her son's death, a little research about Casey Sheehan revealed that
contrary to being tricked by military recruiters, Casey Sheehan had re-enlisted in the U.S. Army voluntarily when he was 24-years-old, after serving his first hitch successfully.

-- Casey Sheehan was in fact a hero who received a Bronze Star.

-- He was attached as a mechanic to the artillery division of the 1st U.S. Cavalry in Iraq. When a convoy of soldiers from Casey's unit was attacked in Sadr City by insurgents, Casey volunteered to join a rapid rescue force to get them out.

-- His commanding sergeant told him he did not have to go into combat, because he was a mechanic and not an infantryman.

-- Casey was quoted telling his officer, "I go where my chief goes." He
was tragically killed during the rescue attempt.

-- *The source for this story? Cindy Sheehan herself. !!!!!!!

I also visited an army recruiting office on my way home and asked about Casey being promised a job as a chaplain's assistant only to be thrust into harm's way.

The recruiter explained to me that on re-enlistment, the Army's B.E.A.R. program (Bonus Extension and Retaining) guarantees everything in writing. If Casey was a mechanic during his first hitch, that was the only thing he would have been guaranteed per his re-enlistment contract.

Further research showed that a chaplain's assistant is a combat infantry position, whereas Casey was deployed in a non-combat job as a mechanic.

Casey Sheehan sought combat duty for his country and should be honored for it, not used as a symbol of how evil the United States is.

The final warm up before Stewart spoke was handled by Jess Mackler from The Defense of Mumia Abu-Jamal Movement.

He said, "The Supreme Court has decided that innocence is no defense.

Lynne Stewart is charged with conspiring to aid and abet a conspiracy to commit terrorist attacks against unnamed people at unknown places in foreign countries. She didn't harm anyone is any way."

He also said that Omar Abdel Rahman was an "innocent man," despite incontrovertible proof of his complicity in the 1993 bombings at the World Trade Center. Mackler called the prosecution of Stewart "the new McCarthyism promoted by the U.S. government" and concluded,

"You wonderful people in the ISO will be the best defenders of Lynne and Mumia. We have to make the price of corruption too high to pay."

Finally, Lynne Stewart rose to speak.

A roly-poly grandmother, Stewart
doesn't look the part of a revolutionary and friend to terrorists.

But just as her appearance was deceiving, so was her discussion about her case.

Stewart maintained all she did was disseminate some press releases
relating to Abdel Rahman, which she claimed was her duty to protect her client. She was neither remorseful nor even willing to admit she made a mistake.

What she didn't say was that Abdel Rahman, being a well-known cleric and having contacts with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt (he was involved in the assassination of Anwar Sadat), was using Lynne Stewart to pass
messages to tell his terrorist followers he did not support a ceasefire with Egypt - the very reason the Blind Sheikh was being held incommunicado. He had already refused treatment for his diabetes in prison to inspire militant Islamists overseas to take action to release him before he died.

(Stewart claimed the government "refused" him medication.)

Nonetheless, she compared what she did with asking for a pair of glasses for a client who is under arrest and cannot read the charges against him or her.

She also never mentioned that the government had not just a few, but
hundreds of recordings of her in which she discussed with Abdel Rahman how to rally his followers to return to violence, and a major turning point in her case was when the prosecution played a tape of Osama Bin Laden (Al Qaeda) and his aides discussing the need to "spill blood in the fields of jihad unless Abdel Rahman was released."

Over the years, she advocated violence openly at private meetings of radical groups such as Worker'sWorld Party and the Spartacist League.

(Communists!!!!!)

Her slipup was allowing herself to be quoted advocating violence in
their newspapers such as the Worker's Vanguard over several years, all of which was used as evidence against her. She was also taped at later radical leftist meetings telling people that what was getting her convicted was the fact that these groups were writing down what she
said.

But Stewart's final denouement came on the witness stand when her
attorney, Michael Tigar, asked her if she knew Abdel Rahman was writing out fatwas to kill Jews and her reply was that yes, she could not deny this to him because the Blind Sheik said that killing Jews was a good thing.

She and Tigar thought the jury would buy their revolutionary zeal as much as the radical types in the ISO at San Francisco State would.

The jury didn't buy it. Only the academic elite believe her.

FRONT PAGE MAGAZINE URL :

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=17915

Copied & saved- that is very damaging.

ROFLMAOPIMP!

You've nailed it!

Very good insight.
Thank you!

Everyone who is active in politics has to work out for themselves the terms and balance between civility and advocacy. The problem for conservatives and Republicans is that the accepted custodians of civility -- the news media -- long ago abandoned neutrality and fairness.

Routinely, but especially when the title is on the line, the news media are like corrupt boxing refs who tolerate kidney and groin punches against you but call fouls on you without any basis for doing so. In practice, calls for "civility" in politics are usually nothing but code for telling Republicans and conservatives to take their beatings and go home as losers.

How often are Democrats and the Left called to account for their below the belt tactics? For weeks now, Cindy Sheehan has been figuratively standing on her soldier son's coffin and calling President Bush his murderer. Have you heard many calls from the news media for "civility" and that Cindy Sheehan should be ignored as a kook?

Instead, Sheehan is promoted by the media and the Left as some sort of figure of motherly grief who is beyond criticism. Her lies about her meeting with Bush are ignored, as are the objections of her own immediate family and strong support for Bush from the families of other KIAs. I pity and despise Sheehan for her conduct but I do not hate her.

Conversely, when the Clintons were under fire for numerous scandals involving corruption, dishonesty, and perjury, the news media eagerly promoted the Democratic line that Republicans were mean-spirited, sex-obsessed cranks. Civility was called for, but what was intended and obtained was a de facto pardon for Clinton's crimes and a justification and endorsement of his viciousness toward political opponents.

If you are in the ring as a conservative or Republican public figure of any consequence, you are going to get pummeled and lose unless you come up with counter-strategies to the attacks that will innevitably be made against you. The Republican moderate strategy is to curry favor with the news media, who then build you up. McCain, Hagel, and Specter are all examples of Republican moderates who are news media pets, with many more at the state and local level.

The better, essential approach for Republicans and conservatives is to keep smiling, stay cool most of the time, and then stick it hard to the opposition. Often, it is best to use surrogates and campaign advertising for negative attacks; and for direct attacks, a smile and sharp-edged understatement can make palatable a strong attack on the opposition. After decades of practice, Reagan was a master at it.

Civility is not a great, binding principle of politics. It is a matter of taste and appearances, but is not, never has been, and never will be more than that. Even in a well-established democracy under the rule of law, politics is about who rules, something so consequential that in most places through most of history it was settled by killing, threatening, and cheating.

One's primary obligation in politics is not to some vague notion of civility but to be an effective advocate for your views and for the party and candidates whom you support. One must stay within the bounds of law and truth, but beyond that, politics is about winning elections and ruling the country.

As for Chrisitan ethics, one should bear in mind that Christ chased the moneychangers out of the temple and declared that he brought not peace, but a sword. In the political context, I take that as meaning that divisions are to be expected, and especially when great issues are involved.

A great post. Leftism dooms itself with the blasphemous fatuity that "We can perfect ourselves!" "No absolute right and wrong!" Pride is the ultimate sin...