NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.nbc11.com/news/6634368/detail.html

"Cindy Sheehan said she will be part of the live audience during the president's State of the Union speech to congress Tuesday.

Bay Area Congresswoman Lynn Woosley gave anti-war activist a gallery pass late Tuesday, just hours before the planned State of the Union speech. Sheehan was in Washington to protest the president during his national address, but then came word she was invited to see the speech live."

I really hope she exposes the entire TV audience to what a bunch of fools the left-wing extremist in America are.

Well, pulling off a goofy-ass stunt isn't going to improve her in the eyes of Americans, so she'd be well advised to avoid one. Even if you don't like the President or his policies, respect the office of the Presidency enough so that he can say what he wants to without being heckled...anything else is childish.

what a bunch of fools the left-wing extremist in America are.
You don't have left-wing extremists in the States. Hell, you don't even have a proper left wing.

You know, a movement that includes the likes of Pat Robertson and the entire whackjob religious right ought not be talking smack about left wing extremists.

All things being equal, I'll take left wing extremists over right wingers anyday--why? Because left wing extremists want to end wars and make sure that poor people have food and health care. Right wing extremists seem to want to make war and make sure that poor people are even more fucked than they already are.

I bet she gets removed quietely before it even starts.

All things being equal, I'll take left wing extremists over right wingers anyday--why? Because left wing extremists want to end wars and make sure that poor people have food and health care. Right wing extremists seem to want to make war and make sure that poor people are even more fucked than they already are.

No, a left-wing extremist wants the same thing as a right-wing extremist: They want to tell others how to live their lives and impose their will on everyone through any means necessary, and they are convinced that their way is the only correct one. Ultimately, they both are detrimental to democracy and social freedom. The only difference is how they plan to get to that goal. There's a difference between a strong left or right winger and extremists, and extremists are bad regardless of their convictions.

You know, a movement that includes the likes of Pat Robertson and the entire whackjob religious right ought not be talking smack about left wing extremists.

All things being equal, I'll take left wing extremists over right wingers anyday--why? Because left wing extremists want to end wars and make sure that poor people have food and health care. Right wing extremists seem to want to make war and make sure that poor people are even more fucked than they already are.

Ahhh I love gross and board generalization.

Ahhh I love gross and board generalization.
Surely, as in, "all across the board generalizations".

Nyuk.

Sheesh some people don't know when to STFU. First Chavez, now this. Oh well. It's a good thing threads like this START as attacks of board generalizations, they get responded to in kind.

Ahhh I love gross and board generalization.
Board generalization is when I call all right-wingers two-by-fours.

I think the "extremist" tag was enough to limit the group I was talking about. Most people on this board don't fall into the extremist group, no matter how much I disagree with them.

Surely, as in, "all across the board generalizations".

Nyuk.


I think he actually misspelled "broad".

You don't have left-wing extremists in the States. Hell, you don't even have a proper left wing.
Hey, someone kick the CD player, it's skipping again.

Board generalization is when I call all right-wingers two-by-fours.

I think the "extremist" tag was enough to limit the group I was talking about. Most people on this board don't fall into the extremist group, no matter how much I disagree with them.

Eh, you're right, my bad.

I think he actually misspelled "broad".
Ya think? :D

You've got to take your shots when you're open.

Hey, someone kick the CD player, it's skipping again.
He's right. There isn't a significant leftist movement in the US, no matter what Savage or Hannity or O'Reilly or the voices that get transmitted into your head via your braces tell you.

He's right. There isn't a significant leftist movement in the US, no matter what Savage or Hannity or O'Reilly or the voices that get transmitted into your head via your braces tell you.
Well, arn't you the cute little hate-monger.

At thr risk of dragging this conversation back on topic, I think Sheehan has already been arrested. CNN thinks so too.

At thr risk of dragging this conversation back on topic, I think Sheehan has already been arrested. CNN thinks so too.
That's unfortunate. I really think she would have behaved, but it would have made for an interesting address just waiting to see her misbehave.

At thr risk of dragging this conversation back on topic, I think Sheehan has already been arrested. CNN thinks so too.

Eh right now, CNN is covering Michael Jackson, AGAIN. Jeez, now if you want an example of an media whore, Michael Jackson is a media whore.

Well, arn't you the cute little hate-monger.
Hate? No hatred. You're mistaking disdain for hatred. It may be a subtle difference to you, but trust me, it's a significant one.

This is precisely why someone like Cindy Sheehan actually is a remarkable character. She really is/was just like anybody else, someone who finally decided to try to effect change for the positive. It's her earnest stick-to-it-edness that indelibly marks her as one of your own, America. Look, let me try to put this into consumerite terms: she's the product. Vilify her, you vilify the very spirit of your collective soul.

Eh right now, CNN is covering Michael Jackson, AGAIN. Jeez, now if you want an example of an media whore, Michael Jackson is a media whore.

Equally, I think the media is pimping Michael Jackson just as much as MJ is whoring.

Anyone else get pissed when FOX or MSNBC gives yet another update on the Nataly Halloway story?

"This just in....she's still missing and she's still was a cute white girl."

It's friggin NOT NEWS. One girl going missing is NEVER national news.

That's unfortunate. I really think she would have behaved, but it would have made for an interesting address just waiting to see her misbehave.
They saw her with something. She had . . . she had. . .
It is almost too horrible to say . . . but, I must go on . . .
Cindy Sheehan had . . . A BANNER!!!
*duhn, duhn, duhn*

*insert caustic witticism containing a cautionary subtext here*

They saw her with something. She had . . . she had. . .
It is almost too horrible to say . . . but, I must go on . . .
Cindy Sheehan had . . . A BANNER!!!
*duhn, duhn, duhn*
Damn, I wish they would have let her in.

Damn, I wish they would have let her in.
I'm sure you do--now she gets to be a martyr.

Maybe she won't engage in the Stalinesque clapping orgy! :eek:

She's not going to try a stunt though. She'll probably just sit there and stare at Bush, and he'll notice her and then feel bad and say even less meaningful combinations of words than usual.

Oh well, we still have that reaction speech by Chavez and Sheehan.:)

Maybe she won't engage in the Stalinesque clapping orgy! :eek:

She's not going to try a stunt though. She'll probably just sit there and stare at Bush, and he'll notice her and then feel bad and say even less meaningful combinations of words than usual.
She was arrested, she won't be there.

She was arrested, she won't be there.
Mmmh...how democratic. Bush supporters only, is it? Or how much is a ticket?

Mmmh...how democratic. Bush supporters only, is it? Or how much is a ticket?
She had a sign! You can't fuck around with signs, she could have done anything with it. Like, maybe, conveyed a message!

Mmmh...how democratic. Bush supporters only, is it? Or how much is a ticket?

Twenty thousand dollars and your soul. That or your soul and a neighbors soul gets you a 20% discount.

I think it's a pity she wasn't able to plan whatever gag she had planned for this speech. That may have made it amusing enough to be worth watching. Although her act's getting pretty old too.

Twenty thousand dollars and your soul. That or your soul and a neighbors soul gets you a 20% discount.

I think it's a pity she wasn't able to plan whatever gag she had planned for this speech. That may have made it amusing enough to be worth watching. Although her act's getting pretty old too.
You know, I've been one of Sheehan's strongest supporters here, but in this case, this just smells. She had to know she wouldn't get the banner into the SOTU address--it's the Congress, not a World Series game--so she did it just to get arrested and make the news. So far it hasn't hit the MSNBC website, so maybe that'll backfire as well, though I can't imagine the "conservative" commentators resisting the chance to take a shot at her.

Although her act's getting pretty old too.
See, that's the thing - I don't think it is an act.

You don't have left-wing extremists in the States. Hell, you don't even have a proper left wing.

Bah. And you lack a proper right wing. So what's your point?

Bah. And you lack a proper right wing. So what's your point?
Oh, we have everything the right wing in the US aspires to be...skinheads! :p

Oh, we have everything the right wing in the US aspires to be...skinheads! :p

Skinheads are leftwing. :rolleyes:

Bah. And you lack a proper right wing. So what's your point?
My point is, lacking a proper left wing, it makes people like Cindy Sheehan that much more remarkable.

That they're speaking out in the face of vilification and ostracism, saying things that make certain elements in American society very uncomfortable - uncomfortable enough that they seek to muzzle them.

But they aren't some mystery army of communist sleeper cels; they aren't even remotely left-of-centre.

They are you.

You, awake.

Instead of the same-old, same-old semi-somnambulent status quo.

Skinheads are leftwing. :rolleyes:
:confused:

Not in Germany they ain't.

:confused:

Not in Germany they ain't.
And not in the US either. They're most closely linked to the so-called Patriot movement, aka the white supremacists, and they're definitely not left wingers.

My point is, lacking a proper left wing, it makes people like Cindy Sheehan that much more remarkable.

That they're speaking out in the face of vilification and ostracism, saying things that make certain elements in American society very uncomfortable - uncomfortable enough that they seek to muzzle them.

But they aren't some mystery army of communist sleeper cels; they aren't even remotely left-of-centre.

They are you.

You, awake.

Instead of the same-old, same-old semi-somnambulent status quo.

And you could make exactly the same case in reverse about someone on the far right in wherever you are from; obviously. Therefore your argument collapses on itself. (Unless you are from one of those countries that doesn't have free speech).

So it's silly. Anyway, the US does have a left wing. It just doesn't have a visible left wing at the federal level. Mostly for technical reasons that I happen to disagree with.

And you could make exactly the same case in reverse about someone on the far right in wherever you are from; obviously. Therefore your argument collapses on itself.
Like Hell it does. Anyway, I'm not talking about, or making observations about some other place. I'm talking about America, and Americans in particular. If you're trying to get a rise out of me, you'll have to try harder.

:confused:

Not in Germany they ain't.

Skinheads, in the UK, are a tradtionally working class pride movement. They are also, strangely enough, tied to the west indian community.

The whole racism thing was something that was painted on later by angry academics.

And not in the US either. They're most closely linked to the so-called Patriot movement, aka the white supremacists, and they're definitely not left wingers.

What does white supremecy have to do with the right wing?

You can find racists on both the left and right. Likewise 'patriots'.

In any event, probably the most notorious white supremacist in the country is Robert Byrd, a democrat.

I think of Mama Moonbat as a real life Forest Gump. One day she's swapping spit with Hugo. Next day she's back to stalking the President.

What does white supremecy have to do with the right wing?

You can find racists on both the left and right. Likewise 'patriots'.

In any event, probably the most notorious white supremacist in the country is Robert Byrd, a democrat.
White supremacy groups in the US have been part of the extreme right-wing since the Civil rights era. They formed the backbone of the Dixiecrat movement, and their less virulent forms make up groups like the Council of Concerned Citizens groups in Mississippi and Alabama, which are basically offshoots of the old KKK. Coincidentally, they tend to support either Republican politicians or third party groups like the Constitution party in those states. The other extremist groups, like those in Idaho and the Dakotas, are even more fragmented--for them, the Republicans are liberal sellouts. If that doesn't put them on the extreme right edge, then I don't know what does. Then there's the skinheads who are linked with the Minuteman movement--same story as above. They think the republicans in their areas (who tend to be the more reactionary types) are too soft.

As for your comment about Byrd, well, at least he apologized for his association with the Klan many times and became a defender of civil rights. The same can't be said for Thurmond, who died an unrepentant segregationist, or for his political offspring like Trent Lott.

Looks like Jihad Cindy was looking to make every leftist happy. Idiot.

White supremacy groups in the US have been part of the extreme right-wing since the Civil rights era. They formed the backbone of the Dixiecrat movement, and their less virulent forms make up groups like the Council of Concerned Citizens groups in Mississippi and Alabama, which are basically offshoots of the old KKK. Coincidentally, they tend to support either Republican politicians or third party groups like the Constitution party in those states. The other extremist groups, like those in Idaho and the Dakotas, are even more fragmented--for them, the Republicans are liberal sellouts. If that doesn't put them on the extreme right edge, then I don't know what does. Then there's the skinheads who are linked with the Minuteman movement--same story as above. They think the republicans in their areas (who tend to be the more reactionary types) are too soft.

As for your comment about Byrd, well, at least he apologized for his association with the Klan many times and became a defender of civil rights. The same can't be said for Thurmond, who died an unrepentant segregationist, or for his political offspring like Trent Lott.

No. I agree with you. Nixon's southern strategy was absolutely reprehensible. But I don't feel it was right wing. It was populist.

I'm what you'd consider a rather right wing person. And it has nothing to do with racism. I could go back an cite things that FDR did - as are detailed in the Power Broker by Robert Cairo - which are tantamount to segregationism in the north. Basically, racism isn't a right or left issue. And to characterize it as such does a disservice to political discourse.

And yeah, I hated Thurmond too. But he's not alive, and he isn't usually held up by the left wing, so he wouldn't have been illustrative of the point that racism is not just a right wing thing. Also I don't give a shit what Byrd said after the fact, he was a huge KKK person in the day, so he should resign.

Hitler was a vegetarian.

Ya think? :D

You've got to take your shots when you're open.
Seconded. *bows*
:D

Well, pulling off a goofy-ass stunt isn't going to improve her in the eyes of Americans, so she'd be well advised to avoid one. Even if you don't like the President or his policies, respect the office of the Presidency enough so that he can say what he wants to without being heckled...anything else is childish.



Didn't work. A lot of anti-bush people tried to do just that outside, drown him out.

She had a sign! You can't fuck around with signs, she could have done anything with it. Like, maybe, conveyed a message!

that traitor! doesn't she know that this is america?

Jihad Cindy

does this shit honestly pass as clever in your circles?

My point is, lacking a proper left wing, it makes people like Cindy Sheehan that much more remarkable.

That they're speaking out in the face of vilification and ostracism, saying things that make certain elements in American society very uncomfortable - uncomfortable enough that they seek to muzzle them.

But they aren't some mystery army of communist sleeper cels; they aren't even remotely left-of-centre.

They are you.

You, awake.

Instead of the same-old, same-old semi-somnambulent status quo.

Right, go back to whatever country you hail from and stop talking about Americans, since you seem to have no grasp of who we are and you have no idea what you're talking about. There is definately a difference between speaking out and heckling.

And Cindy Sheehan is a heckler.

Looks like Jihad Cindy was looking to make every leftist happy. Idiot.

First off, STFU. As an American I have the right to say that, and as an American with this government in charge, I have the right to have you arrested and held without trial for using the j-word.

She f***ing lost her son. I'd be a bit pissed off, too.

Well, pulling off a goofy-ass stunt isn't going to improve her in the eyes of Americans, so she'd be well advised to avoid one. Even if you don't like the President or his policies, respect the office of the Presidency enough so that he can say what he wants to without being heckled...anything else is childish.

What stunt? Do you know what her stunt was? She had an anti-Bush or anti-Iraq War t-shirt on and refused to cover it up since, y'know, we have the right to free speech and free expression and all that fun stuff. It's not like she crashed it or anything, she was a guest of one of the political-types.. so she was invited.

It was a trap. They set a trap for her. They knew she couldn't just sit there. :p

Right, go back to whatever country you hail from and stop talking about Americans, since you seem to have no grasp of who we are and you have no idea what you're talking about. There is definately a difference between speaking out and heckling.

And Cindy Sheehan is a heckler.

Well this is the Net and he is posting from whatever country he is from.

Heckling is nothing more then a label by those that don't like what is said.

Even then freedom of speech says she can heckle all she wants.....

It was a trap. They set a trap for her. They knew she couldn't just sit there. :p

Does that mean she is on her way to Gitmo?

First off, STFU. As an American I have the right to say that, and as an American with this government in charge, I have the right to have you arrested and held without trial for using the j-word.

She f***ing lost her son. I'd be a bit pissed off, too.

Her family has also disowned her and she is also known to be borderling insane and an attention whore as she was growing up. Her son signed up for the military, he wasn't drafted. She's doing his memory a dishonor.

What stunt? Do you know what her stunt was? She had an anti-Bush or anti-Iraq War t-shirt on and refused to cover it up since, y'know, we have the right to free speech and free expression and all that fun stuff. It's not like she crashed it or anything, she was a guest of one of the political-types.. so she was invited.

Right, that is a stunt. You don't show up to the State of the Union Address looking like a heckler. You don't see Kerry walking in with a shirt that's Anti-Bush do you? No, he at least tries at speaking his mind at a public forum.

Cindy Sheehan only wants to get her face on TV. If she really wanted to speak her mind, she would've gone just like everyone else, took notes. And after it was done, walk outside, and tear Bush a new-one with a great moving speech.

But nope. She's just like every other heckler on the planet. She only wants to cause problems, and she has no real solutions.

http://www.nbc11.com/news/6634368/detail.html

"Cindy Sheehan said she will be part of the live audience during the president's State of the Union speech to congress Tuesday.

Bay Area Congresswoman Lynn Woosley gave anti-war activist a gallery pass late Tuesday, just hours before the planned State of the Union speech. Sheehan was in Washington to protest the president during his national address, but then came word she was invited to see the speech live."

I really hope she exposes the entire TV audience to what a bunch of fools the left-wing extremist in America are.

Extremists?

The left has some, sure. You've got plenty on the right.

With Pat Robertson and Pat Buchanan as Presidential candidates not that long ago, I'd be a bit more careful throwing stones from your glass house.

Does that mean she is on her way to Gitmo?

Let's see if she vanishes before we jump to conclusions.

Well this is the Net and he is posting from whatever country he is from.

Heckling is nothing more then a label by those that don't like what is said.

Even then freedom of speech says she can heckle all she wants.....

There is a big difference between real freedom of speech and just speaking just to get a rise out of people. She serves no purpose other than to heckle and be just annoying. Maybe if she tried to honor her son's name by doing something honorable, instead of just being so losse-cannoned idiot, people would take her seriously.

Right, go back to whatever country you hail from and stop talking about Americans, since you seem to have no grasp of who we are and you have no idea what you're talking about. There is definately a difference between speaking out and heckling.

And Cindy Sheehan is a heckler.
After repeated attempts at civil discourse, the right-wingers did (AS USUAL) the work of administration to paint her as an attention-whore at the time. It wasn't heckling until the party ran with it and did what they do with ANYONE with legit concerns that isn't already bought-and-paid-for Repub property. After that it became fairly obvious that anything she said would be construed exactly the way the right-wing arseholes wanted it to be spun. So you don't hear from her for a few months.
And now ....

Let's see if she vanishes before we jump to conclusions.

If she disappears, no one will miss her. She only hurts the liberal movement with her antics and pisses off the conservatives with her non-stop idiocy.

No. I agree with you. Nixon's southern strategy was absolutely reprehensible. But I don't feel it was right wing. It was populist.

I'm what you'd consider a rather right wing person. And it has nothing to do with racism. I could go back an cite things that FDR did - as are detailed in the Power Broker by Robert Cairo - which are tantamount to segregationism in the north. Basically, racism isn't a right or left issue. And to characterize it as such does a disservice to political discourse.

And yeah, I hated Thurmond too. But he's not alive, and he isn't usually held up by the left wing, so he wouldn't have been illustrative of the point that racism is not just a right wing thing. Also I don't give a shit what Byrd said after the fact, he was a huge KKK person in the day, so he should resign.

Hitler was a vegetarian.

1. And the Pope should resign because he was a Hitler youth. No one should ever be able to put anything behind them. And circumstances shouldn't matter.

2. Nixon's southern strategy. What about Reagan's? And Lee Atwater's And Karl Rove's? They have all been absolutely reprehensible.

If she disappears, no one will miss her. She only hurts the liberal movement with her antics and pisses off the conservatives with her non-stop idiocy.

Sure, when a liberal does it, she's a nut. When a conservative does it, he's President. :p

Sure, when a liberal does it, she's a nut. When a conservative does it, he's President. :p
Seconded.
That, and his strategery is being misunderestimated.

After repeated attempts at civil discourse, the right-wingers did (AS USUAL) the work of administration to paint her as an attention-whore at the time. It wasn't heckling until the party ran with it and did what they do with ANYONE with legit concerns that isn't already bought-and-paid-for Repub property. After that it became fairly obvious that anything she said would be construed exactly the way the right-wing arseholes wanted it to be spun. So you don't hear from her for a few months.
And now ....

What civil discourse? Did she lead marches like MLK? Give speeches like MLK? Have worthy proposals like MLK? "have a dream?" like MLK did, have attainable, realistic, sensible dreams? Hell no. All she did was whine about how she wants to talk to Bush.

She talked to Bush. He answered her questions. She didn't like those answers. And instead of acting like an adult and having a concise debate over WHY we should pull out of Iraq and HOW, etc....

She went on heckling.

Her family has also disowned her

don't lie

and she is also known to be borderling insane and an attention whore as she was growing up. Her son signed up for the military, he wasn't drafted. She's doing his memory a dishonor.

but i'm sure he'd love the idea of you lying and slandering his mother were he still alive.

There is a big difference between real freedom of speech and just speaking just to get a rise out of people. She serves no purpose other than to heckle and be just annoying. Maybe if she tried to honor her son's name by doing something honorable, instead of just being so losse-cannoned idiot, people would take her seriously.

Ahhh Freedom of Speech means the ability to say stupid hateful things.

As it was said in "The American President"

"America isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship. You've gotta want it bad, 'cause it's gonna put up a fight. It's gonna say, "You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours." You want to claim this land as the land of the free? Then the symbol of your country cannot just be a flag. The symbol also has to be one of its citizens exercising his right to burn that flag in protest. Now show me that, defend that, celebrate that in your classrooms. Then you can stand up and sing about the land of the free."

Seconded.
That, and his strategery is being misunderestimated.

What does his speech pattern have to do with anything? That's called heckling. Speaking for no good reason but to hear yourself speak. Much like Cindy Sheehan does.

Sure, when a liberal does it, she's a nut. When a conservative does it, he's President.

FDR was a liberal nut, and he was president. Bush is a conservative nut, and he's president.

Where's your point?

Aww damn, I forgot one of the reasons why I was quoting.

Respect the President and the position? Those're two different things. Just because someone doesn't like who the President is, doesn't mean they think the job's a load of crap. And why should I respect the President? Seriously. Why? Because he's President? No. I'll respect the position, but not the person if I don't like the person.

Or are you saying that Americans have freedoms.. so long as they don't interfere with the Government's plans? Does that include the right and freedom to vote, too?

Let's see if she vanishes before we jump to conclusions.

True. She might simply go off and have tea with Bin Laden, Hitler, and Stalin.

don't lie

I don't. Did you not see the letter published by every other member of the Sheehan family? They basically disowned her and completely disagreed with her actions.

but i'm sure he'd love the idea of you lying and slandering his mother were he still alive.

Were he still alive, this country would be a better place for it. And Lying and slandering requires to things. For me to lie and slander :)

What does his speech pattern have to do with anything? That's called heckling. Speaking for no good reason but to hear yourself speak. Much like Cindy Sheehan does.

You don't really understand the concept of marketplace of ideas, do you?

Freedom of speech is just that.

What does his speech pattern have to do with anything? That's called heckling. Speaking for no good reason but to hear yourself speak. Much like Cindy Sheehan does.

QFT.. and to point out that you're the one responding to each and every post, often not making a lick of sense or with fact to back up your claims. :)

To: Pot
From: Kettle

Subject: Black

Hi, Pot? Yeah, this' Kettle. I just wanted to let you know that you're black.

Sincerely,
Pot

What civil discourse? Did she lead marches like MLK? Give speeches like MLK? Have worthy proposals like MLK? "have a dream?" like MLK did, have attainable, realistic, sensible dreams? Hell no. All she did was whine about how she wants to talk to Bush.

She talked to Bush. He answered her questions. She didn't like those answers. And instead of acting like an adult and having a concise debate over WHY we should pull out of Iraq and HOW, etc....

She went on heckling.

MLK was beaten, soaked with firehoses, and put in jail. And he was one of the finest speakers of the last century. Not everyone has to be MLK. No one else could be.

EDIT: And don't tell me that you would have been an MLK supporter when he was speaking out against the Vietnam War the way Cindy Sheehan has spoken against the current war. MLK was a man of peace. He wouldn't support this war either.

Or are you saying that Americans have freedoms.. so long as they don't interfere with the Government's plans? Does that include the right and freedom to vote, too?

What are you babbling on about? You respect a person no matter who they are nor what position they hold in life. Maybe they teach you different in a liberal household, but I give respect to everyone, no matter their position in life, their beliefs, the race, their creed, and the color of their skin.

Bush should have every last inch of your respect not because he's your president, but because he's a human being. Not respecting him because of his beliefs is the same thing as not respecting blacks because they're a different skin color.

I respect Cindy Sheehan's opinion of hating Bush. I dislike how she does it. It's not conducive to a solution, only to exacerbating a problem.

What's to lie and slander about?

Mama Moonbat had a legitimate point in the beginning of this debacle; her son died, and she wasn't too pleased about that. Can't say I blame her.

A few months down the road she and Al Sharpton had had too many gettogethers and now she's become something of a mouthpiece for everything that the more nutty liberals want to say, but don't want to lose political credibility over.

First, it was simply her son. Fair enough. Then it was Gulf War II as a whole. Next, Israel. If that wasn't enough, she starts this movement to prevent Hillary from running for president if she doesn't stop supporting said Gulf War II. What?

More recently, she seems to keep jumping in front of police and cameras at inopportune times, and gets thrown in the back of a cruiser grinning all the way. I think she likes the attention too much.

That camp in Crawford became something of a joke as well. Remember all those crosses for our KIAs in Iraq? Turns out some of the families of those KIAs started turning out and removing the crosses for their loved ones on account of they didn't support her movement. Cindy's friends replaced them the next day with fresh ones. Oi...

I've been considering signing up with Blackwater and going over to Iraq. $800 a day is -nice- money. However, assuming I found myself on the recieving end of an RPG-7, I don't think I'd much like my dear mother bouncing around the country with Jesse Jackson and Hugo Chavez, bitching about how Bush killed me. My wallet killed me! :P

What civil discourse? Did she lead marches like MLK? Give speeches like MLK? Have worthy proposals like MLK? "have a dream?" like MLK did, have attainable, realistic, sensible dreams? Hell no. All she did was whine about how she wants to talk to Bush.

She talked to Bush. He answered her questions. She didn't like those answers. And instead of acting like an adult and having a concise debate over WHY we should pull out of Iraq and HOW, etc....

She went on heckling.
I'll just bold what you provided, as limited as it is.
Also, that he didn't give answers pertinent to the why, the same reason why there was a gag order on the returning caskets.
I'll also point out that you in all likelihood didn't lose as much as she did, and you don't even have the excuse of bereavement for not having a plan or concise debate over WHY we should pull out of Iraq and HOW, etc....

What does his speech pattern have to do with anything? That's called heckling. Speaking for no good reason but to hear yourself speak. Much like Cindy Sheehan does.



FDR was a liberal nut, and he was president. Bush is a conservative nut, and he's president.

Where's your point?

Point? *looks around* Isn't this NationStates? WHen did a point become a prerequisite? :confused:

QFT.. and to point out that you're the one responding to each and every post, often not making a lick of sense or with fact to back up your claims. :)

To: Pot
From: Kettle

Subject: Black

Hi, Pot? Yeah, this' Kettle. I just wanted to let you know that you're black.

Sincerely,
Pot


lmao. That's pretty funny. Similar to, "And the Crow calls the Raven black." It's a little more concise, don't you think? And btw, everyone is quoting me and responding to a post that I've written. It's not as if I'm just randomly responding.

What does his speech pattern have to do with anything? blahblablah
Pay closer attention. You're doing great as a right-wing rep.
Where's your point?
Again i say pay attention.

Bush should have every last inch of your respect not because he's your president, but because he's a human being. Not respecting him because of his beliefs is the same thing as not respecting blacks because they're a different skin color.



So do you respect say Stalin, Bin Laden, Hitler, Pol Pot,
Sadaam and his sons, Pinochet.....

Respect is earned; not given.....

What are you babbling on about? You respect a person no matter who they are nor what position they hold in life. Maybe they teach you different in a liberal household, but I give respect to everyone, no matter their position in life, their beliefs, the race, their creed, and the color of their skin.

Bush should have every last inch of your respect not because he's your president, but because he's a human being. Not respecting him because of his beliefs is the same thing as not respecting blacks because they're a different skin color.

I respect Cindy Sheehan's opinion of hating Bush. I dislike how she does it. It's not conducive to a solution, only to exacerbating a problem.

You've certainly shown that respect for Ms. Sheehan in your posts here. :headbang:

But, pray tell, what should she do that is "conducive to a solution" and how exactly is she "exacerbating a problem"?

So do you respect say Stalin, Bin Laden, Hitler, Pol Pot,
Sadaam and his sons, Pinochet.....

Respect is earned; not given.....

Can I ask what Bush has to do with any of those famous dictators?

Furthermore, why'd you omit Mao from the list? He killed more than Hitler and Stalin combined. And they still wave his picture around in China! I've got one of his little red books in a box somewhere, now that I think about it...

MLK was beaten, soaked with firehoses, and put in jail. And he was one of the finest speakers of the last century. Not everyone has to be MLK. No one else could be.

EDIT: And don't tell me that you would have been an MLK supporter when he was speaking out against the Vietnam War the way Cindy Sheehan has spoken against the current war. MLK was a man of peace. He wouldn't support this war either.

... I never said he would support this war. I would've been an MLK supporter based upon him wanting to give Civil Rights to everyone in this country. I may not agree with his stance on Vietnam, but I do agree with his stance on Civil Rights.

When did being a supporter happen to mean that I have to agree with everything he said. I support McCain, but I still believe in torture. I supported Reinquist, but I still believe in a woman's right to choose.

Any man who makes up his mind on one issue and one issue only is a sad sad man.

I don't. Did you not see the letter published by every other member of the Sheehan family?

no, because such a thing does not exist.

You've certainly shown that respect for Ms. Sheehan in your posts here. :headbang:

But, pray tell, what should she do that is "conducive to a solution" and how exactly is she "exacerbating a problem"?

Her having an opinion that isn't manufactured by the government isn't conducive to the solution and it's exacerbating a problem.

Oh, and Empyria? ..|., Don't ever call me f***ing racist again or even imply it.
Oh hey look, there's an emoticon for it! :upyours: That'll do nicely. :)

Can I ask what Bush has to do with any of those famous dictators?

Furthermore, why'd you omit Mao from the list? He killed more than Hitler and Stalin combined. And they still wave his picture around in China! I've got one of his little red books in a box somewhere, now that I think about it...

Re-read his comment about having to respect people.

"Not respecting him because of his beliefs is the same thing as not respecting blacks because they're a different skin color."

I forgot about Mao. ;)

Ack, guess I jumped to the obvious conclusion there. Sorry. :P

no, because such a thing does not exist.

You're gonna look silly if said letter does exist, and he displays it in the near future.

Can I ask what Bush has to do with any of those famous dictators?

Furthermore, why'd you omit Mao from the list? He killed more than Hitler and Stalin combined. And they still wave his picture around in China! I've got one of his little red books in a box somewhere, now that I think about it...


Try to pay attention.

Arguing that we all must respect Bush no matter what, Empyria claimed: "I give respect to everyone, no matter their position in life, their beliefs, the race, their creed, and the color of their skin"

The Black Forrest listed some people whom perhaps don't deserve respect. And, no, Mao was not left of the list for any particular reason. Are you familiar with "....."? It means the list isn't complete. TBF also didn't name Nero or Attila the Hun.

Again, my apologies.

About Attila and Nero, though, one could argue that they're not famous dictators in the same sense as Stalin and Hitler, however.

... I never said he would support this war. I would've been an MLK supporter based upon him wanting to give Civil Rights to everyone in this country. I may not agree with his stance on Vietnam, but I do agree with his stance on Civil Rights.

When did being a supporter happen to mean that I have to agree with everything he said. I support McCain, but I still believe in torture. I supported Reinquist, but I still believe in a woman's right to choose.

Any man who makes up his mind on one issue and one issue only is a sad sad man.

So, in hindsight, you support MLK on some things but not others. How convenient.

(And I doubt you agree with him on any issue you can name other than Civil Rights. How convenient again.)

You're gonna look silly if said letter does exist, and he displays it in the near future.

all he'll be able to come up with is a thing written by one of her ex in-laws (with assumed support of others from that side of the family) that expresses disapproval for her political activities and her/their support for bush and his imperial adventures.

So do you respect say Stalin, Bin Laden, Hitler, Pol Pot,
Sadaam and his sons, Pinochet.....

Respect is earned; not given.....

lmao. Isn't that the classic trick, bring up the insane people of humanity's history?

Stalin gave America something to fight against, and helped improve our economy. I respect him for helping to make America and industrial giant, and the foremost power on the planet.

I respect Bin Laden for helping us get the oil in Afghanistan and Iraq.

I respect Hitler for finally proving to us that we NEVER sit by and genocide just happen. And of course, that tanks are awesome.

I don't really know about Pol Pot, so I won't speak on him. I know of the atrocities he commited, but nothing else.

Sadaam is gave us an interesting trial in Iraq. It's going to be the next big comedy on NBC and will help make the American Economy more money.... Or at least be an SNL skit.

Shall I go on?

(if you don't get it, this post is sarcasm to the nth degree)

I still believe in torture

?!

You're gonna look silly if said letter does exist, and he displays it in the near future.
There's not much precedent so far for anyone to tremble THAT outcome.
But if they actually did exist, go ahead and bring 'em on! So far, we've got tepid right-wing bilge. We can already get that and better from other posters here.

If you want to get technical, Pinochet gave us the first warship to be sunk by a nuclear submarine. Look up 'General Belgrano' on Google and get a laugh or two.

...

It was an ex-USN ship, too. -______-*

(if you don't get it, this post is sarcasm to the nth degree)
:eek:
Oh, Wow.... :rolleyes:

lmao. Isn't that the classic trick, bring up the insane people of humanity's history?

Stalin gave America something to fight against, and helped improve our economy. I respect him for helping to make America and industrial giant, and the foremost power on the planet.

I respect Bin Laden for helping us get the oil in Afghanistan and Iraq.

I respect Hitler for finally proving to us that we NEVER sit by and genocide just happen. And of course, that tanks are awesome.

I don't really know about Pol Pot, so I won't speak on him. I know of the atrocities he commited, but nothing else.

Sadaam is gave us an interesting trial in Iraq. It's going to be the next big comedy on NBC and will help make the American Economy more money.... Or at least be an SNL skit.

Shall I go on?

(if you don't get it, this post is sarcasm to the nth degree)

apparently you don't get it.

I still believe in torture.

WTF?

And you claim your an MLK supporter? Non-violence and torture are opposites.

apparently you don't get it.

well...

I still believe in torture

well...

MLK would be so proud. :headbang: :headbang:

WTF?

And you claim your an MLK supporter? Non-violence and torture are opposites.

Maybe he wants to play prisoners Yoko Ono songs 24/7. :p

Maybe he wants to play prisoners Yoko Ono songs 24/7. :p

Guffah!

Or maybe Men Without Hats? I think one of their songs was in the audio assault against Noriega (sp?).

So, in hindsight, you support MLK on some things but not others. How convenient.

(And I doubt you agree with him on any issue you can name other than Civil Rights. How convenient again.)

I really don't know how to respond to that.

Oh, and Free Soviets, here's the letter...

http://www.drudgereport.com/flashcs.htm

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45726

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cindy_Sheehan#Criticism

There's not much precedent so far for anyone to tremble THAT outcome.
But if they actually did exist, go ahead and bring 'em on! So far, we've got tepid right-wing bilge. We can already get that and better from other posters here.

So, do we wanna go some more?

I really don't know how to respond to that. I don't even know if I want to respond to this. But I will. I agree with a lot of people on a lot of different things, and I disagree with a lot of people on a lot of different things. I'm a firm believer in abortion-rights, but I believe 'privacy' is hoax. I believe in rehabilitation for some incarcerated people, but also in the death penalty. I don't believe in universal healthcare but I believe in job placement and subsidies to drug companies who sell their drugs at lower prices. Am I now to be villified because I don't neatly fit into some box? How convenient....

You support torture and have some bat-shit crazy ideas, but your worried about fitting in some box.

You are the one that started referring to MLK and waving him around as your flag. As it turns out, you are fundamentally opposed to MLK's basic beliefs. And that is my fault?

So, do we wanna go some more?
Woowee we gots a live one here!!
So far you've qualified ONE thing, so yeah, now you're only slightly above n00b. Way to go. There's still plenty of others that pwn you sideways.
But i'll give you props for two things ... one,
you actually did some research. Good for you. Welcome to a bigger world.

Two,
Am I now to be villified because I don't neatly fit into some box? How convenient.... - you.
Your ego is very proportional to the victim complex so often overtly expressed by other right-wingers here. That'll do you wonders in a debate. Keep up the good work. The rest of them have disproportionate senses of self as well.
:)

EDIT: oh, as a direct response to your post (which was refreshingly on topic for a change), sure, just have some brevity about it, since tonight's Dirty Job episode is in many ways dealing with more intellectually challenging material than your ego ... like when Mike catches the sample and has to dig through it for corn and obstructions.

Oh, and Free Soviets, here's the letter...

http://www.drudgereport.com/flashcs.htm

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45726

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cindy_Sheehan#Criticism

that's nice. so, got anything to support your claim?

Her family has also disowned her

I really don't know how to respond to that.

Oh, and Free Soviets, here's the letter...

http://www.drudgereport.com/flashcs.htm

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45726

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cindy_Sheehan#Criticism

As your own links explain, the letter is from one in-law. It is not from the entire Sheehan family as you claimed.

On 11 August 2005 Matt Drudge made public an email he claims to have received from Sheehan's sister-in-law (and Casey's paternal aunt), Cherie Quartarolo, in which she was quoted as saying:

"We do not agree with the political motivations and publicity tactics of Cindy Sheehan. She now appears to be promoting her own personal agenda and notoriety at the expense of her son's good name and reputation. The rest of the Sheehan Family supports the troops, our country, and our President, silently, with prayer and respect."
Quartarolo signs the email "Casey Sheehan's grandparents, aunts, uncles and numerous cousins."[216], but does not mention the individual names of these relatives.

During a series of interviews published on several websites, Sheehan responded to Quartarolo's statement:

"My in-laws sent out a press conference disagreeing with me in strong terms; which is totally okay with me, because they barely knew Casey. . . ."
"We have always been on separate sides of the fence politically and I have not spoken to them since the elections when they supported the man who is responsible for Casey’s death."[217]
Sheehan clarified that:

" . . . my immediate family, Casey's dad and my three children and my sister, we're all on the same page. And I really think that some of my husband's siblings are with us too." [218]

WTF?

And you claim your an MLK supporter? Non-violence and torture are opposites.

Oh boy... making myself clear to people surely is a chore. Anyways... I never meant torture people for the god-damned sake of torturing people. When did non-violent peace protests equate to getting required information out of dangerous people. It's not like MLK decided to go plant some firebombs. If MLK planted firebombs, we wouldn't be having this conversation. And I mean dangerous in the sense that he's going to kill lots of people, not march down the street.

As your own links explain, the letter is from one in-law. It is not from the entire Sheehan family as you claimed.

damn you, factual reality! damn you!!!

Oh boy... making myself clear to people surely is a chore. Anyways... I never meant torture people for the god-damned sake of torturing people. When did non-violent peace protests equate to getting required information out of dangerous people. It's not like MLK decided to go plant some firebombs. If MLK planted firebombs, we wouldn't be having this conversation. And I mean dangerous in the sense that he's going to kill lots of people, not march down the street.

Oh boy .... do you not understand anything about what MLK stood for.

In his view, torture would never be acceptable. He didn't believe violence was acceptable, period. Try reading something about MLK.

Oh boy... making myself clear to people surely is a chore.
Maybe you AND Bush both have to learn how to talk like normal people.
So you have a decent response to this:

that's nice. so, got anything to support your claim?,

and
As your own links explain, the letter is from one in-law. It is not from the entire Sheehan family as you claimed.
AND Wikipedia,
'cuz if you don't, you're at a notch of horizontal capacity to the other right-wing blowhards here, as i mentioned before.

Maybe you AND Bush both have to learn how to talk like normal people.
So you have a decent response to this:

,

and

AND Wikipedia,
'cuz if you don't, you're at a notch of horizontal capacity to the other right-wing blowhards here, as i mentioned before.

If I knew there'd be entertainment, I would've made some popcorn! *throws a bag in the microwave* :)

hm... I just realized something. My replies haven't been put together with too much thought. I apologize for the lack of coherency and intelligence in most if not all of my recent posts. It's 1:30 AM, I haven't slept in the past three days, save a nap or two, and have been studying non-stop for finals. My break from studying didn't turn out to be just a 'break' so it seems. Anyways, I sincerely apologize if I happened to offend anyone with the aforementioned posts (I don't think I offended anyone), and promise to get some more sleep/and or think a post through before posting. Though, I must admit, my posts are rather embarassing for their lack of intellect, and must've been rathering amusing. So, before looking like just a mouthpiece for a Bush Agenda, I shall bid you adieu and good night (or morning or whatever it is).

Blast! It was just getting good too! :mad:

Oh, well. G'night, Empryia

hm... I just realized something. My replies haven't been put together with too much thought. I apologize for the lack of coherency and intelligence in most if not all of my recent posts. It's 1:30 AM, I haven't slept in the past three days, save a nap or two, and have been studying non-stop for finals. My break from studying didn't turn out to be just a 'break' so it seems. Anyways, I sincerely apologize if I happened to offend anyone with the aforementioned posts (I don't think I offended anyone), and promise to get some more sleep/and or think a post through before posting. Though, I must admit, my posts are rather embarassing for their lack of intellect, and must've been rathering amusing. So, before looking like just a mouthpiece for a Bush Agenda, I shall bid you adieu and good night (or morning or whatever it is).
Well, back to Mike Rowe and the cow-flop. *shrug*
Hey, LG, share a lil', maybe? Watching manure-sifting puts on a nasty hunger pang.

Well, back to Mike Rowe and the cow-flop. *shrug*
Hey, LG, share a lil', maybe? Watching manure-sifting puts on a nasty hunger pang.

*opens the bag* Help yourself. Careful, it's hot. :)

*opens the bag* Help yourself. Careful, it's hot. :)
Ow! Ow!!There goes my love life!!! :(

MAybe someone posted this before, but:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/31/sheehan.arrest/index.html

An early report from a senior House official indicated that Sheehan was arrested for unfurling an anti-war banner, but that was later found not to be the case. Schneider said she didn't know what Sheehan's T-shirt said.

For wearing a T-shirt.

Is there a rule against T-shirts? I honestly can say I don't know.

MAybe someone posted this before, but:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/31/sheehan.arrest/index.html



For wearing a T-shirt.

Is there a rule against T-shirts? I honestly can say I don't know.
it was an Anti-bush/anti war slogan. she was asked to either change or cover it up, but she refused.

it was an Anti-bush/anti war slogan. she was asked to either change or cover it up, but she refused.

I'd still like to know what law she was arrested for violating. Not questioning it, just curious.

it was an Anti-bush/anti war slogan. she was asked to either change or cover it up, but she refused.

So much for Free Speech. At least the algebra equation on where the Freedom and Democracy that Shrub wants to spread to the rest of the world is coming from has been solved.

Freedom and Democracy is being outsourced too apparently.

And the more I read about crap like this, the more I can't help but wonder if Scalito being confirmed about the same time Coretta Scott King died is a sign from God that Civil Rights has officially died in the United States.

http://www.nbc11.com/news/6634368/detail.html

"Cindy Sheehan said she will be part of the live audience during the president's State of the Union speech to congress Tuesday.

Bay Area Congresswoman Lynn Woosley gave anti-war activist a gallery pass late Tuesday, just hours before the planned State of the Union speech. Sheehan was in Washington to protest the president during his national address, but then came word she was invited to see the speech live."

I really hope she exposes the entire TV audience to what a bunch of fools the left-wing extremist in America are.
If I heard the news correctly ( I was busy posting on here! ), she was escorted from the building. :D

However, much as I dislike the far left, they aren't what I would call "fools." Some of them are very bright and strive to be intellectually honest, something many on the far right appear to have a major struggle with. :)

So much for Free Speech. At least the algebra equation on where the Freedom and Democracy that Shrub wants to spread to the rest of the world is coming from has been solved.

Freedom and Democracy is being outsourced too apparently.

And the more I read about crap like this, the more I can't help but wonder if Scalito being confirmed about the same time Coretta Scott King died is a sign from God that Civil Rights has officially died in the United States.
Ah, Gauthier. Abstruse as always I see. :D

Ah, Gauthier. Abstruse as always I see. :D

However, much as I dislike the far left, they aren't what I would call "fools." Some of them are very bright and strive to be intellectually honest, something many on the far right appear to have a major struggle with. :)

Physician, heal thyself :rolleyes:

If I heard the news correctly ( I was busy posting on here! ), she was escorted from the building. :D

However, much as I dislike the far left, they aren't what I would call "fools." Some of them are very bright and strive to be intellectually honest, something many on the far right appear to have a major struggle with. :)

Now that sounds like a centrist. ;) :)

So much for Free Speech. At least the algebra equation on where the Freedom and Democracy that Shrub wants to spread to the rest of the world is coming from has been solved.

Freedom and Democracy is being outsourced too apparently.

And the more I read about crap like this, the more I can't help but wonder if Scalito being confirmed about the same time Coretta Scott King died is a sign from God that Civil Rights has officially died in the United States.

Let's not overreact.

Ms. Sheehan was arrested, but she complied politely and smiling.

I assume there is a rule about protests/signs on the House floor (or at least during the State of the Union). I assume such a rule is neutral as to content.

Thus, I assume Ms. Sheehan violated an neutral rule and was treated accordingly.

My assumptions may be wrong, in which case I'll be really pissed, but I think that is the far most likely explanation.

I bet she gets removed quietely before it even starts.

Hey, congrats, you called it first! Yay!
Here, have a cherry-flavoured cookie :D

Now that sounds like a centrist. ;) :)

One post does not make a centrist, in contrast to his vast number of Bush worshipping Liberal-bashing threads.

I'd still like to know what law she was arrested for violating. Not questioning it, just curious.
Causing a disturbance? guess it would be the same as wearing a I 'Heart' KFC shirt to a PETA rally, or "Kill all the Lawyers" to a dinner honering a Lawyer. all you're doing is trying to cause a disturbance.

Free Speech is ok, but there has to be some responsibility on the part of the speaker.

If I heard the news correctly ( I was busy posting on here! ), she was escorted from the building. :D

However, much as I dislike the far left, they aren't what I would call "fools." Some of them are very bright and strive to be intellectually honest, something many on the far right appear to have a major struggle with. :)
Fools and Idiots abound everywhere. both sides got em and both sides wish they were on the other side. :D

Now that sounds like a centrist. ;) :)
ROFLMAO! Uh ... thanks, I think. :confused:

:D

Let's not overreact.

Ms. Sheehan was arrested, but she complied politely and smiling.

I assume there is a rule about protests/signs on the House floor (or at least during the State of the Union). I assume such a rule is neutral as to content.

Thus, I assume Ms. Sheehan violated an neutral rule and was treated accordingly.

My assumptions may be wrong, in which case I'll be really pissed, but I think that is the far most likely explanation.
from what I heard/read, the arrest/escort was polite and without incident. however, I don't know what her reaction was. I hope it too was polite and just as incident free.

One post does not make a centrist, in contrast to his vast number of Bush worshipping Liberal-bashing threads.
Oh for God's sake, Gauthier! Get the fuck over it already! I have never, nor do I now "worship Bush." Period! The first time he ran, I didn't even VOTE for him!

If you had ever bothered to read a random number of the posts I make, you would know that I "bash" both left and right. I "bash" the left more often on here because there are so many of them and SOMEone has to try and explain why sometimes the right is, in fact, right. As I have tried and tried to explain, I am what the US calls "left" when it comes to civil rights and freedoms, and what the US calls "right" when it comes to the need for a strong military and international relations.

What part of this do you NOT understand? :confused:

Causing a disturbance? guess it would be the same as wearing a I 'Heart' KFC shirt to a PETA rally, or "Kill all the Lawyers" to a dinner honering a Lawyer. all you're doing is trying to cause a disturbance.

Free Speech is ok, but there has to be some responsibility on the part of the speaker.

I'm not sure I'd say that wearing an anti-war T-shirt was irresponsible on the scale you describe. After all, a large portion of the House and Senate are Democrats and many hold the opinions of the shirt.

Fools and Idiots abound everywhere. both sides got em and both sides wish they were on the other side. :D
LOL! Personally, I just wish they would all go away! :D

One post does not make a centrist, in contrast to his vast number of Bush worshipping Liberal-bashing threads.

Somebody is a Mr. Grumpypants this morning! :p

I think Eut leans more right than he admits/realizes and I do agree he tends to bash the left in his posts far, far more than the right, but there is no need to be rude about it out of the blue. The man had just said something "bashing" the right and praising (to a degree) the left.

Maybe its a carrot vs. stick thing. I was offering a carrot and you whipped out the stick! :D

Fools and Idiots abound everywhere. both sides got em and both sides wish they were on the other side. :D

Agreed. And well said. :)

That woman is a disgrace to America, what a way to honor the memory of your son who was killed in Iraq than to urge the president to pull out of Iraq and let her son's be in vain.

I'm not sure I'd say that wearing an anti-war T-shirt was irresponsible on the scale you describe. After all, a large portion of the House and Senate are Democrats and many hold the opinions of the shirt. True, however, they keep their opinions to either themselves or in small conversations, I believe she was the only one wearing her opinion right out in the open. tacky, and it can be construed as a deliberate attempt to... for lack of a better term, Troll and Flamebait. And as I said, that's what I read in one of the articles. (Yahoo news I believe it was.)

That woman is a disgrace to America, what a way to honor the memory of your son who was killed in Iraq than to urge the president to pull out of Iraq and let her son's be in vain.

Perhaps she knows how to honor her son better than you do.

Perhaps it is not disgraceful not to see more lives lost unnecessarily.

True, however, they keep their opinions to either themselves or in small conversations, I believe she was the only one wearing her opinion right out in the open. tacky, and it can be construed as a deliberate attempt to... for lack of a better term, Troll and Flamebait. And as I said, that's what I read in one of the articles. (Yahoo news I believe it was.)

I assume you mean they kept their opinions quite during the State of the Union Address itself.

There must be some rule about wearing slogans or signs and stuff. I don't see it to be particularly tacky to have a dog as a major guest, but not one lady in the audience with a t-shirt.

I think it arguable that wearing a slogan and getting arrested was the highest profile, yet least tacky, way for Ms. Sheehan to maximize the media impact of her invitation to the Address. I see nothing wrong with that. Simply a type of civil disobedience.

Perhaps she knows how to honor her son better than you do.

Perhaps it is not disgraceful not to see more lives lost unnecessarily.
No kidding. There are no doubt many legitimate reasons to criticize Sheehan, but it's the height of arrogance to claim that she's dishonoring her son's memory through her protest.

Perhaps she knows how to honor her son better than you do.

Perhaps it is not disgraceful not to see more lives lost unnecessarily.

She met up with Hugo Chavez, wants to become senator, and is a complete media whore.

And there was a vanity fair picture with her LYING on her son's fucking grave.

Disgrace indeed.

Canada City']She met up with Hugo Chavez,

So?

Canada City']wants to become senator,

So? I thought being a Senator was honorable not disgraceful.

Canada City']and is a complete media whore.

Unlike? I think you'll find most pundits and politicos are media whores.

Canada City']And there was a vanity fair picture with her LYING on her son's fucking grave.

Disgrace indeed.

Again, you have the arrogance to judge how a mother should greive her own son.

I assume you mean they kept their opinions quite during the State of the Union Address itself.

There must be some rule about wearing slogans or signs and stuff. I don't see it to be particularly tacky to have a dog as a major guest, but not one lady in the audience with a t-shirt.

I think it arguable that wearing a slogan and getting arrested was the highest profile, yet least tacky, way for Ms. Sheehan to maximize the media impact of her invitation to the Address. I see nothing wrong with that. Simply a type of civil disobedience.Yep, civil Disobedience. While I will support Mrs. Sheehan's right to wear that shirt and believe what she wants, there are times and places for it. and getting arrested did put the spotlight on her (for a moment anyway) but what impact would there be if she went dressed conservatively, heard the speech and (when the reporters asked her for her opinion) gave her viewpoints about the speech. If she is thinking of running for senator, being conservative in action but still getting her viewpoints across would help dampen those who just think she's now just using her son's death to gain more airtime as well as gives people an image that yes, she can be government material.

Would all of you so upset about Cindy Sheehan's mere existence please come down from those crosses? We could use all the wood to build a bridge to peace.

No kidding. There are no doubt many legitimate reasons to criticize Sheehan, but it's the height of arrogance to claim that she's dishonoring her son's memory through her protest.
to be fair, it's just as arrogant to say that her actions are honoring her son's memory as well.

I do agree with Cat-tribe, How one decides on how to greive as well as what honors their memory is different from person to person. Everyone who's lost someone will put them up on a pedistal, and it's up to them what to do with that pedistal.

Yep, civil Disobedience. While I will support Mrs. Sheehan's right to wear that shirt and believe what she wants, there are times and places for it. and getting arrested did put the spotlight on her (for a moment anyway) but what impact would there be if she went dressed conservatively, heard the speech and (when the reporters asked her for her opinion) gave her viewpoints about the speech. If she is thinking of running for senator, being conservative in action but still getting her viewpoints across would help dampen those who just think she's now just using her son's death to gain more airtime as well as gives people an image that yes, she can be government material.

Of course, she may care about her cause more than the rumors about her running for office.

Her primarily role has been as a lightning rod getting attention to the issue. She does that well. She re-invigorated the anti-war movement.

Yep, civil Disobedience. While I will support Mrs. Sheehan's right to wear that shirt and believe what she wants, there are times and places for it. and getting arrested did put the spotlight on her (for a moment anyway) but what impact would there be if she went dressed conservatively, heard the speech and (when the reporters asked her for her opinion) gave her viewpoints about the speech. If she is thinking of running for senator, being conservative in action but still getting her viewpoints across would help dampen those who just think she's now just using her son's death to gain more airtime as well as gives people an image that yes, she can be government material.
From a PR standpoint, I think that the arrest was about the best Sheehan could hope for (and I said much the same thing last night over at the Daily Kos). She got to distract attention from the SOTU address without coming off as a whackjob. If she'd stayed for the speech, the "commentators" would have seized on any facial tic, anything that displayed an emotion other than adoration for Dear Leader, and blown it out of proportion to emphasize her disdain for Bush. But by being arrested for apparently doing nothing more than wearing a t-shirt, she's able to reclaim martyr status, being persecuted for speaking her mind.

Of course, she may care about her cause more than the rumors about her running for office.

Her primarily role has been as a lightning rod getting attention to the issue. She does that well. She re-invigorated the anti-war movement.
true, that is a possiblity. then again, could she just be a tool of the senator who invited her? hmmmm... [conspiracy theorists, you may start your engines. :D ]

true, that is a possiblity. then again, could she just be a tool of the senator who invited her? hmmmm... [conspiracy theorists, you may start your engines. :D ]
Actually, it was a member of the House who invited her.

I don't know how many people here would be interested, but Cindy Sheehan has posted her version of events over at Daily Kos (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/2/1/31944/23746). Obviously, the story has as much credibility as Sheehan has, which will likely be much or none depending on your point of view, but nothing she said contradicted the published accounts of the arrest, which have been sketchy to say the least.

Actually, it was a member of the House who invited her.

I don't know how many people here would be interested, but Cindy Sheehan has posted her version of events over at Daily Kos (http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/2/1/31944/23746). Obviously, the story has as much credibility as Sheehan has, which will likely be much or none depending on your point of view, but nothing she said contradicted the published accounts of the arrest, which have been sketchy to say the least.

Thanks. Very interesting.

How one decides on how to greive as well as what honors their memory is different from person to person. Everyone who's lost someone will put them up on a pedistal, and it's up to them what to do with that pedistal.
This is true, but in Ms. Sheehan's case, her son volunteered for service, then volunteered to extend his enlistment and return to Iraq. If he were alive now, do you think he would approve of his mother's opposition to the very thing for which he volunteered? Somehow, I don't think so.

It was irresponsible for Woolsey to have offered her the ticket. She should have known that Sheehan would have tried to use it as a platform for something. When I heard she was going, the only thing I could think of was that halfway through the speech they'd have to drag Sheehan out because she'd be interrupting yelling "murderer" or something equally nonsensical.

The officers should have had better sense, though, because this is only going to create more sympathy for Sheehan, which is unnecessary. She's already spent her 15 minutes of fame. She doesn't need 15 minutes more. We get her point - she doesn't like the war.

How one decides on how to greive as well as what honors their memory is different from person to person. Everyone who's lost someone will put them up on a pedistal, and it's up to them what to do with that pedistal.This is true, but in Ms. Sheehan's case, her son volunteered for service, then volunteered to extend his enlistment and return to Iraq. If he were alive now, do you think he would approve of his mother's opposition to the very thing for which he volunteered? Somehow, I don't think so.

JuNii was right.

Why he volunteered and why he re-upped have been explained in ways that (if believed) are entirely consistent with his mother's current opposition to the war.

Do you have any personal knowledge of Casey Sheehan and what he would think? Somehow, I don't think so.

It was irresponsible for Woolsey to have offered her the ticket. She should have known that Sheehan would have tried to use it as a platform for something. When I heard she was going, the only thing I could think of was that halfway through the speech they'd have to drag Sheehan out because she'd be interrupting yelling "murderer" or something equally nonsensical.

The officers should have had better sense, though, because this is only going to create more sympathy for Sheehan, which is unnecessary. She's already spent her 15 minutes of fame. She doesn't need 15 minutes more. We get her point - she doesn't like the war.

Since when is it irreponsible for someone to use a political event as a platform for something (or to help someone do it)?

Since when is it irreponsible for someone to use a political event as a platform for something (or to help someone do it)?

Psst, it's because they fundamentally believe that the President is some sort of aristocracy, rather than a public servant.

From a PR standpoint, I think that the arrest was about the best Sheehan could hope for (and I said much the same thing last night over at the Daily Kos). She got to distract attention from the SOTU address without coming off as a whackjob. If she'd stayed for the speech, the "commentators" would have seized on any facial tic, anything that displayed an emotion other than adoration for Dear Leader, and blown it out of proportion to emphasize her disdain for Bush. But by being arrested for apparently doing nothing more than wearing a t-shirt, she's able to reclaim martyr status, being persecuted for speaking her mind.I agree.

This is true, but in Ms. Sheehan's case, her son volunteered for service, then volunteered to extend his enlistment and return to Iraq. If he were alive now, do you think he would approve of his mother's opposition to the very thing for which he volunteered? Somehow, I don't think so.

You can disagree with someone and still support them. You can volunteer for something you don't want to do out of a strong sense of duty, (See Robert E. Lee.)

You can disagree with someone and still support them. You can volunteer for something you don't want to do out of a strong sense of duty, (See Robert E. Lee.)

The reenlistment rate among active duty soldiers in all branches is exceeding targets by a wide, wide margin. So go figure, Gymoor.

Maybe he was helping some Iraqis and could tell that at least his part of the war was working in a way that he liked.

While his mother has every right to grieve, and to protest, I believe that at this point it is disingenous to say that she's doing anything but carving a career. After her PR advisors (who were freely paid for by outsiders like Soros) found out that no one was showing at her book signings anymore, they switched to making a more aggressive attempt to get arrested and in the public eye (sitting in a tent outside of the Bush ranch just wasn't cutting it).

If she had no PR advisors, and wasn't having her plane trips paid for by an organization (meals, hotels, etc, as well) that was partially funded by Soros, and did something like sit in front of the White House (or the Bush ranch), and didn't have bumper stickers, hangers-on, etc., and wasn't personally speculating about challenging Senator Feinstein, then I would have some sympathy.

The reenlistment rate among active duty soldiers in all branches is exceeding targets by a wide, wide margin. So go figure, Gymoor.

I have no doubts about their dedication and their sense of duty.

Maybe he was helping some Iraqis and could tell that at least his part of the war was working in a way that he liked.

Exactly. But that doesn't even imply that he was behind the reasoning or the justification for the war. He still had a job to do and good to do while doing it.

While his mother has every right to grieve, and to protest, I believe that at this point it is disingenous to say that she's doing anything but carving a career. After her PR advisors (who were freely paid for by outsiders like Soros) found out that no one was showing at her book signings anymore, they switched to making a more aggressive attempt to get arrested and in the public eye (sitting in a tent outside of the Bush ranch just wasn't cutting it).

If she had no PR advisors, and wasn't having her plane trips paid for by an organization (meals, hotels, etc, as well) that was partially funded by Soros, and did something like sit in front of the White House (or the Bush ranch), and didn't have bumper stickers, hangers-on, etc., and wasn't personally speculating about challenging Senator Feinstein, then I would have some sympathy.

I have no doubts about her political motivations either. I also have no doubt that some of her motivations for her political motivations are care and love for her son and his memory. She's a human though, and healthy people usually don't do something on a national scale for just a single reason. That's almost monomania.

Yet another reason I distrust the black and white rhetoric of pundits and politicians.

I assume there is a rule about protests/signs on the House floor (or at least during the State of the Union). I assume such a rule is neutral as to content.

I don't know about a rule like that, but they reported on NBC earlier that a conservative woman was also arrested, for having a t-shirt that said "support our troops". So at least it wasn't "screw you liberals" kind of thing.... Personally I think that that sort of thing is kind of disruptive (given the somberness of the event), and both those people should've just stood outside the door and made their statement there. ::shrugs::

That woman is a disgrace to America, what a way to honor the memory of your son who was killed in Iraq than to urge the president to pull out of Iraq and let her son's be in vain.

What a better way to honor the memory of your son than to try to keep other people's sons and daughters from being killed because of our president's lies.

No, a left-wing extremist wants the same thing as a right-wing extremist: They want to tell others how to live their lives and impose their will on everyone through any means necessary, and they are convinced that their way is the only correct one. Ultimately, they both are detrimental to democracy and social freedom. The only difference is how they plan to get to that goal. There's a difference between a strong left or right winger and extremists, and extremists are bad regardless of their convictions.

Bravo! Nice to see someone has some objectivity left! This gives me hope.

I don't know about a rule like that, but they reported on NBC earlier that a conservative woman was also arrested, for having a t-shirt that said "support our troops". So at least it wasn't "screw you liberals" kind of thing.... Personally I think that that sort of thing is kind of disruptive (given the somberness of the event), and both those people should've just stood outside the door and made their statement there. ::shrugs::
Just to let you know--the conservative woman was a Congressman's wife and she wasn't arrested, just removed from the chamber. Sheehan was arrested, but the charges were dropped today and the Capitol Police admitted they made a mistake in both cases. There is a law in the US Code that bars protests inside the Capitol building, but a Supreme Court decision from the early 70s noted that simply wearing a button or a t-shirt with a message on it did not constitute protest, but was protected speech.

What I'm taking away from this is that Bush's handlers are so scared of any potential disruption that they're overreacting. Remember, this isn't the first time the Secret Service has removed people from public places simply because of the clothes they were wearing--it happened on the campaign trail and on the Social Security tour more than once.

I'd heard from more than two sources that it was a shirt displaying the number of dead, and a query as to how many more had to die, or something like that.

Representative Bill Young, as quoted by the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/01/AR2006020100348.html):
"When your wife is insulted and embarrassed, you do tend to get a little offended," Young said yesterday, explaining his upbraiding of Gainer that night and his fervent speech on the House floor yesterday morning, when he waved the shirt and bellowed about his wife's ejection: "Shame! Shame!"

Young said he wouldn't be so mad if it were just Sheehan. "I totally disagree with everything she stands for," he said. But by removing his wife, Gainer's officers clearly "acted precipitously," Young said.

So... You have the right to free speech, as long as I agree with you?

Representative Bill Young, as quoted by the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/01/AR2006020100348.html):


So... You have the right to free speech, as long as I agree with you?
That's about the size of it--for Young, anyway. If I really try to find a silver lining in the actions of the Capitol Police, it's that they were bi-partisan in their violation of the 1st Amendment.

Bush may or may not be an idiot but he is a professional polititian.This Sheehan woman is not.Whatever her motives she will get creamed in debate with Bush.If she thinks she is going to show him up as an idiot or indeed to get answers she is sorely mistaken.Bush is trained to handle some of the best journalists in the world and he will go to work on her.This is an extreemly stupid idea.:rolleyes:

Bush may or may not be an idiot but he is a professional polititian.This Sheehan woman is not.Whatever her motives she will get creamed in debate with Bush.If she thinks she is going to show him up as an idiot or indeed to get answers she is sorely mistaken.Bush is trained to handle some of the best journalists in the world and he will go to work on her.This is an extreemly stupid idea.:rolleyes:

Well I don't know. It's hard to think he would win outright since his speech crowds are pre-screened.

I don't know about his handling the journalists. I haven't seen anybody really go after him.....

Now an interesting debate would be him and Clinton. I think ol'bill would paste him.....

Bush may or may not be an idiot but he is a professional polititian.This Sheehan woman is not.Whatever her motives she will get creamed in debate with Bush.If she thinks she is going to show him up as an idiot or indeed to get answers she is sorely mistaken.Bush is trained to handle some of the best journalists in the world and he will go to work on her.This is an extreemly stupid idea.:rolleyes:
What in the living f*ck planet are you from? Are you talking about Jeb, because you sure as hell can't be talking about George W. "misunderestimated" Bush.
You must not have been paying attention to MOST of Bush's public speeches AND
last but not least
the Kerry/Bush debates?

I can't f*cking believe you. I just can't. :confused: