Title should be "The Beast to meet the Ditchwitch"
If they are not by the same team, they come from the same play-book. (even the actors look the same)
ping
This meeting has the potential to break every camera lens within a 50 mile radius.
Goodbye Ron Paul, it was nice knowing you. I won't support you ever again.
Its time for them to step up and be the opposition party, Sheehan said
Good Lord, has she been ASLEEP?
The Ditch Witch will have her ultimate sucess with Hitlary on stage with her at the anti-war rally in Washington D.C. Sept. 24th. This will be a sight to see (for reasons I cannot give away now).
I sense a Sista Souljah moment coming on...
Concerning Cindy Sheehan, Byron York of National Review also offers a great report:
http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200509220828.asp
As expected, it seems Cindy Sheehan's anti-American tour is nothing more than a small group of self-styled 1960s protestors who clumsily chant worn-out slogans and play boring music. I wonder if they also bathe as regularly as the hippies they portray? If they wish to re-enact the past, at least they could do something interesting like the Civil War or WWII instead of the mind numbing, narcissistic 1960s events they sponsor.
Like the initial Somalia landings, there are more reporters than actual participants at these rallies. Of course, the media is more adept at slight-of-hand and illusion than David Copperfield. Through the use of mirrors and bedazzling assistants, the Great Enlighteners always seem to make a group of 30 seem like 30,000. Looking down from Eternity, Houdini must be envious.
If Rove's comments about Sheehan are true, she is a clown....an amateur clown at best. If only she were a mime. She would certainly do less damage to her country.
That aside, Senators and Congressman are genuflecting and kissing her ring as if she were Cardinal Richelieu as outlined in the Frontpage article on Clinton and Sheehan. Given her organization's oafish actions, such as her caravan getting into a traffic accident in front of the White House, on the surface it's amazing that law makers take her seriously. However, as previous articles point out, Sheehan has a long affiliation with communist causes. Many of the law makers who are rallying around her also have long-standing ties with "progressive" organizations. It's more of a matter of true colors floating to the surface than sympathy with that mean-spirited woman. I reference Frontpage's narrative on how she demeaned a war widow during a recent cable show. When all is said and done and the "cause" is through with her, she'll have to run a free hot dog stand to gather a crowd.
Am I worried about the effectiveness of the overall "anti-war" movement? If left to it's own momentum, no. Many reasonable people see that movement for what it is - a bunch of narcissistic baby-boomers who are trying to justify their misspent lives by escaping into the past. However, I think that movement is capable of sustaining itself in a parasitic manner. People support wars for national security. However, they don't support wars with nebulous missions that SEEMINGLY drag into the infinite future. I think that's the President's Achilles Heel. He needs to regularly communicate the mission to the public and offer concrete examples of success. People will react to that much better than the hazy term of "War on Terror." To quote Michael Leeden, "faster please."
I also think the government needs to better define in layman's terms the threat of WMDs. That hasn't been done very well. Since I served in two branches of the Armed Services, I appreciate the threat of bio, chem and nuke weapons. The government, however, assumes too much when it thinks that the public understands the nuts and bolts of special weapons. Does the man on the street understand how a nerve agent kills? Probably not and that also needs to be better articulated. If that is done, then I am sure that the public will demand that the President keep those weapons out of terrorists hands and eliminate those terrorists who already have them. Under those optimal conditions, Sheehan would be outed as the "useful idiot" she is and would have trouble getting a job as a Wal-Mart greeter.
So it's true then: Sheehan is the antichrist.
LOL
All I have to say is ...... Bahahahaha!!!
Now I'll join the pack in saying, "She's running for President." There's no longer any doubt.
Thanks rdb3 for the great article - lots of links within.
For a laugh - see this.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1489536/posts