Posted on 08/15/2005 7:07:21 AM PDT by ZGuy
Like it or not, the dispute between Cindy Sheehan and some of her family members is news. According to a Solano County court document unearthed by Dang if I Know, there may be a new development in that rift:
i'm sure, on the grounds of lunacy - hers.
surprised the smoking gun does not hae the documents already.
Now she's started to go off about how if Israel withdrew from "Palestine", terrorism would end. Yeah, right. She is obviously a pawn of the left wing nuts from MoveOn. Michael Moore has his hand up her ass and is making her lips move.
She's an idiot, but the left wing media cant get enough of her. Pathetic.
She gets the house, he keeps his son's flag. Let's hope.
HHHHHmmmmm. It appears that after her camping trip, and family begging her to come home, C"I"ndy will have no home to come home to. Actions do have consequence even for the "I" centered.
Hmmm...under type, it says "Dissolution without kids"...don't the Sheehan's still have minor children?
I wonder if Bill Clinton will give her a call now that's she's ''on the market''
Poor man. Looks like he couldn't take the left wing calling his son as a "Baby Killing Nazi". Too bad his ex wife agrees with the left.
I doubt official documents use the term 'kids' instead of 'children'.
As much as I dislike Cindy Sheehan, if her activism is the only reason for the divorce, its a bad reason.
Nevertheless, the husband has a rotten wife.
Poor guy. Tough spot to be in.
That's what I'm thinking...I dunno about this, but Sheehan's blog (I believe) stated that her husband did file.
*shrug*
Rest of family already issued statement disowning her.
It's Bush's fault!
So if she blames Bush for the loss of her son, who does she blame for the loss of her husband?
A full post of the filing was put on FR last Saturday but the Admin Moderator pulled it.....
Freepers were first with the news but the Admin Mod. didn't see it that way.....
NeverGore :^)
While I wouldnt doubt this - I believe we should leave this out of the discussion.
She is a proterrorist demostrator. We should defeat her in the arena of ideas about what she is doing and leave her personal life out of it.
If we are to take up her personal issues like this, it will put us on the same footing as the NYT when they researched Robert's adoption.
Lets beat her on the issues.
Isn't the husband also liable for her non-payment of taxes?
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.