Cindy Sheehan, the mother of a U.S. soldier killed in action in Iraq, has written a column for The Huffington Post that’s getting some attention in the mainstream media.
I thought I’d respond to some of the statements she makes.
This is George Bush’s accountability moment. That’s why I’m here. The mainstream media aren’t holding him accountable. Neither is Congress. So I’m not leaving Crawford until he’s held accountable.
Why is this the President’s “accountability moment?” Because Cindy Sheehan and the anti-war activists tell us it is? It seems to this observer that the President’s “accountability moment” happened back on November 2nd, when he was put back in office by a majority of electoral votes after receiving a significant majority of the popular vote. The President has been held accountable for Iraq by the American people, and those people put in back in office for another 4 years.
]]>< 
This:
“This volley of “I know how to be more sarcastic and condescending than you” is simply the human equivalent of flinging poo. It can be entertaining, but right now, it’s wearing thin and has lost it’s considerable power to charm me.”
is hard to reconcile with entering a thread thus:
“It’s amazing and pretty darned amusing how frightened conservatives are of this former Catholic Youth Minister and Mom, Cindy Sheehan. All the press she is generating has got you folks pretty freaked out, from the looks of the previous posts. Now THAT”S entertainment! So just stay freaked out and yell really loud because it just means more press about this. And by the way, it’s a tad early to be declaring any kind of victory for Rove since the Federal Grand Jury investigation isn’t over until October. Yes, Bushbots, you SHOULD be scared. Your house of cards is crumbling, one cowardly criminal at a time.”
Unlike Zepp01, who walked into a bar to ask directions to the all-night pharmacy and found himself in a barfight already in progess, you came in spoiling. Take you faux civility elsewhere. I’m not buying.
Tob
“Tob,
Just curious. If you do beleive (and it seems you do passionatley), then why are you not there?
I know this will be taken as smart-assy, but I do really want to know.”
I did indeed disregard your question because:
A) Its none of your business.
B) It just seemed like noise which I generally ignore. ie the chickenhawk gambit, the last desperate move of the AW who’s losing the argument.
C) It violates my own rule against imparting identifying and personal info on the internet.
Being more rested and sober this morning and perceiving the opportunity for more amusement at your expense, I have reconsidered. And so,
Perhaps, if you considered your own observation that I use Outdating(sic) Phrases you could have inferred that
I’m now too old for combat and the REMF’s in the service, in their infinite wisdom, have determined that, because of a minor blood disorder (that won’t get you medicaled from active but apparently does prevent you from entering/reenter active service) I’m not even suitable for support tasks. Trust me, I checked.
There you go, lackwit. Make of it what you will.
Tob
I like my anonymity on the web.
Hey Cuckoo Lulu,
Do you run a meth factory or something?
Now about that “reality” thing, what is your specific concern? I lost track of where you wanted to debate part way through the thread, and don’t know which reality concerns you at the moment.
The only reality that concerns me is almost 2000 troops dead, plus untold Iraq civillians- all having asoultley nothing to do with the security of the nation.
I scanned through your chickenhawk/chickshit post, and it still seems that people are equating this to a sporting event. I’m just saying that this is far more serious than I think most imagine.
And Tob, if that really is the truth and you physically can’t go than I would really respect your descision to fight for something you beleive in.
My problem here is I just wish our goverment would spend a quater of the money that it spends on Iraq into catching Osma Bin Laden.
But really, let’s try to put all the bullshit (liberal, conservative, moonbat, etc.) aside for one day and really think why our country is there, and why people are critizing the mother of a son who was killed. So I ask again:
Who exactly is using her?
Why are people attacking her?
Isn’t it time we brought the troops home and concentrated on finding those responible for 9/11, instead of invading a country that had nothing to do with it?
All is ask is one day where people talk about the reality of war, instead of talking about themselves with clever cute little name-calling,
“The only reality that concerns me is almost 2000 troops dead, plus untold Iraq civillians- all having asoultley nothing to do with the security of the nation.”
In your opinion. That the point or contention. Its rather not manifest that OIF has nothing to do with security. In my case, I’m an American Hegemonist. I am NOT the world. I love by proximity. I love and care for my God, my family, my country, the western tradition and so on in ever decreasing intensity. If it was up to me, OIF would have either been fought like Afganistan (light and fast using indigineous forces and an exile governent) or I would have just burned the place to the ground and said, that’s what you get for F’ing with us. In this one case, I am willing to allow the administration to engage in nation-building. Its part of the overall strategy in the GWOT. I disagree but its not my call. I only hope that the powers-that-be can pull it off and be proved correct. If not, I guess its back to the Nixon/Carter/Bush41/Clinton real-politic (and in the case of Carter, just plain addled policies) that got us into this mess in the first place.
Tob
“And Tob, if that really is the truth and you physically can’t go than I would really respect your descision to fight for something you beleive in.”
I think I could phsyically go but others disagree.
“Who exactly is using her?
Why are people attacking her?
Isn’t it time we brought the troops home and concentrated on finding those responible for 9/11,”
Actually, these questions are a hoot. Let me try:
Who exactly is using her? the enemy
Why are people attacking her? because they don’t fear us enough. Other than that I don’t care why.
Isn’t it time we brought the troops home and concentrated on finding those responible for 9/11? Huh? Is OBL in Toledo?
Tob
Isn’t it now “the struggle against extermism” instead of the the “Global War On Terrorisim”.
Tob,
Is it a point of contention that Iraq had no designs on attacking The US? I’m just trying to figure out why we really are there, if this in fact has to do with National Security. Iraq was a mess, but who are we to correct this at this moment when those responisble for attacking our country still linger.
I’m just still trying what Iraq has to do with all this….and why people are attacking this dead soilder’s mother.
BR, interesting about the Mau Mau. I use the term as we used it here back in the 60’s and it is directly related to the events in Africa. To MauMau someone is to extort and strong-arm someone by the threat of atrocities to come if you don’t buckle. ie ‘The Fire next Time’ sort of thing. It rather evolved to meaning threatening someone when, in fact, you lacked the power to actually do the bad things. ie there are no Mau Mau’s here. ref: ‘Radical Chic and Mau-Mauing the Flak Catchers” by Tom Wolfe.
Actually, these questions are a hoot. Let me try:
Who exactly is using her? the enemy
See this is what I don’t really get. What enemy are you referring to?
Why are people attacking her? because they don’t fear us enough. Other than that I don’t care why.
This I don’t get at all! Fear who?
Isn’t it time we brought the troops home and concentrated on finding those responible for 9/11? Huh? Is OBL in Toledo?
You mean Osama Bin Laden? Please explain.
“Is it a point of contention that Iraq had no designs on attacking The US? I’m just trying to figure out why we really are there, if this in fact has to do with National Security. Iraq was a mess, but who are we to correct this at this moment when those responisble for attacking our country still linger.”
Zep, yep, it is. As I said, (and you could search on my handle for many more full explanations of my thoughts) I disagree with the strategy but lack the full info (and power) to do more. You should stop viewing strategy in such a one-dimensional and, to be frank, provincial worldview. The first rule of the Hobbsian jungle that is international relations is: Reward your friends and punish your enemies. Make no mistake, Saddam was an enemy. The ME understands this and respects the ‘strong horse’. I think that they are mostly baffled by our attempts to ‘do good’.
Tob
I disagree with the strategy but lack the full info (and power) to do more
I don’t think you lack either the info (Iraq having nothing to do with 9/11) nor the power to do more with regard to the strategy (we all had to power to vote Bush out)
I don’t think Saddam was as much as an enemy as we were lead to believe. I still beleive the real enemy is still free, and I think by invading Iraq we have made many more terrorists.
“Who exactly is using her? the enemy
See this is what I don’t really get.
[…] Please explain.”
Arg! Are you being deliberately dense? We were attacked on 9/11 by units of a stateless lawless totalitarian group. How do you fight them? Remove their sancturies and dry up their state and pivate financial support. How do you do that? Make the states and people that support them pay. (for gravy, offer them a better way, hence the nation-building in Iraq).
Tob
Actually, to let you know what a ‘war-mongerer’ I am, I would have reccommended creating somekind of incident that would have allowed us to hit Syria once the 4ID arrived in Iraq. I think that our current problems in Iraq would have been much diminished.
Tob
And you might be thinking, “That sound like Real-politic to me and I thought you said that you didn’t support Real-politic.”
And you would be somewhat correct. My argument with the Kissinger/Scowcroft version of Real-politic is that it was done on the cheap. Support this ass-hat dictator because any other solution was too costly in blood and treasure. I think that a little pain and an actual application of our liberal western views some decades ago would have prevented the current situation. But hey, whatcha gonna do.
Tob
The other problem with Real-politic is that once you start to ride the tiger, there is no good way to get off. Witness, the Shah of Iran. He was a SOB but he was our SOB and an ally against the then greater threat of Soviet expansionism. We let him get deposed and ended up with an Islamic republic, which lead to us sort of supporting Saddam against Iran, which lead to him invading Kuwait which lead to us having to station troops in the Holy Land of Saudi Arabia which lead to OBL.
I wish that we had plowed the ground for democratic reforms earlier there. I don’t like the way we have consistantly ‘kicked the can down the road’ since the end of WWII.
Tob
But enough about me. I’ve got work to do and will check back later.
Tob
RE: zeppo1’s post (August 13, 2005 12:24 PM)
The only reality that concerns me is almost 2000 troops dead, plus untold Iraq civillians- all having asoultley nothing to do with the security of the nation.
I disagree with that sentiment. Iraq did and does have to do with the security of this nation. My concern is of the American lives lost on 9/11, the innumerable assaults to our sovereignty and subsequent deaths preceding 9/11, the agitated rats (with apologies to rats everywhere) scurrying about the globe and carrying the pestilence of Islamofascism, and the nexus of the war and its tentacles protruding from the old Baathist stomping grounds. Iraq has everything to do with our national security right now. The soldiers bottling up that hornets’ nest are performing vital tasks to defend my life, my country, and my beliefs. Thankfully such amazing individuals believe that mission too and place themselves in harm’s way so that this country will prosper. I’ll never yield this position just as those grunts won’t yield theirs. I won’t even touch on the humanitarian effort this country pours into that one to facilitate the expansion of freer peoples. It’s a gesture that is truly American despite its concomitant benefit to our own self-interest. Fortunately, most Iraqis recognize this and will become allies should the terrorist scourge be purged.
…I’m just saying that this is far more serious than I think most imagine.
I think everyone at this site is keenly aware of the circumstances at hand. No one perceives this to be some sort of sport and the vitriol, as you might interpret it to be, is the passionate defense of an equally passionate belief that the stakes are real, high, and quite deadly. I believe a unified front to back the troops with their mission provides for this country the best opportunity for quick and final victory and the minimizing of deaths on the field and at its fringes. Anything that delays that process is damnable to me.
My problem here is I just wish our goverment would spend a quater of the money that it spends on Iraq into catching Osma Bin Laden.
In a world of finite resources and infinite political positioning, logistics of cash flow will always be dynamic and problematic. Because we try to fight a legal and controlled war, we sometimes hamstring ourselves to our detriment. I’d wager that the Left is more inclined to erect barricades in these battlefield endeavors than the Right, but I paint with a broad brush here. Because our military is passionate and disciplined, we won’t advocate scorched-earch tactics, though we certainly have such capabilities. Because we respect law, we don’t intercede in foreign lands without well defined objectives and the participation of other governments. Subsequently, invading sovereign lands to snatch Bin Laden is not some trivial exercise.
Who exactly is using her?
At a minimum, poltical opportunists suffering from BDS.
Why are people attacking her?
I’d recommend reading more contemporaneous posts on this site to get more elaboration; but, briefly, she appears to be grandstanding, denigrating the mission of her son who actively sought the duty, and endangering other soldiers still in the field who must fight an enemy emboldened by her politics… an enemy that cannot win militarily but that can win politically if the likes of Mrs. Sheehan are successful in their undermining of the defense of this country. Vietnam should have been quite instructional in this regard and hardly out of our conscience. It’s a tragedy that such contrived parallels seem to be a self-fulfilling prophecy facilitated by short-term ideologues and mixed subversives. Are there legitimate concerns? Of course, but the alliances with whom Mrs. Sheehan has bonded are not politically disinterested parties seeking only the health and welfare of distant warriors and representatives of our culture. I question these groups’ motives and trust ’em as far as I can throw ’em.
Isn’t it time we brought the troops home and concentrated on finding those responible for 9/11, instead of invading a country that had nothing to do with it?
No, it isn’t time. We are searching for those responsible for 9/11. And Iraq is directly and tangentially related to terrorism. The fact that there have been no catastrophic attacks on American soil should imply, if not actually serve as, a testament that the action in Iraq is successful, justified, and warranted despite imperfect timelines. No war lacks them and this one won’t be the exception. I fear our expectations have become so elevated that we demand “clean” wars paralleling the results of the Gulf War. That is an unreasonable expectation. When stability is established, the American mission may drift, but not a moment prior. I figure the soldiers and their leaders know this and I accept the premise. I also support it.
Well said AnonymousD. Better than my explanation anyway. Its depressing that people insist on asking the same questions of us over and over. They are like people, late to a conversation, who insist that we fill them in on everything we have said heretofore. And when we are pissy they say “We just want to understand your point of view” Let them Google and prepare themselves I say. Thats why we use handles that are unique.
Tob
Plus, its cool when someone referrences something you said last year in their argument, either for or against you. Its definitely a sign of respect that they made the effort not to treat you as a total stranger when they want to argue and force you to define all terms, yet again.
Tob
Zeppo, I have to apologize for calling you dense earlier. I somehow got the impression that the ‘her’ you were talking about in your questions was our country when now I see that you meant Cindy Sheehan.
Sheesh, I guess that I’m the dense one. 😉
Tob
Damn, and now Google will immortalize this:
“… I’m the dense one. …”
Toby928 at August 13, 2005 02:08 PM
Tob
But I still stand by my “Huh? Is OBL in Toledo?”
How does bringing the troops back to the US help capture the perps from 9/11?
Tob
Tob,
I cut some slack if it is a worthwhile topic. I usually try to include as much as is absolutely relevant material to get my point across even if it’s redundant. Of, course, brevity sometimes is the order of the day. My typing skills aren’t conducive to waxing eloquent.
One thing I’d like to see improved upon, technically, here is the search engine. To put it bluntly, it stinks. I just don’t think the archiving script is run enough to categorize everything… or it is busted. I’ve found the use of Google or other engine the only way to find stuff in a minimally timely manner just as you have. I promise, however, not to hold the “dense” quip against you should we take opposing positions. Well, that might be too gracious. I promise that I won’t bludgeon you with it repeatedly in my introductory, supporting, and concluding sentences. 😉
Of course, I never make a mistake, so don’t even bother searching my past posts for them. Really. Just don’t even bother. Please don’t even bother. Pretty please?
RE: AnonymousDrivel’s post (August 13, 2005 01:44 PM)
Oops. Third response – change passionate to compassionate in “…our military is passionate and disciplined…”. They are certainly both but compassionate was the adjective I intended.
Remember, Tob, to ignore this correction. Google knows nothing… no-thing.
AD, agreed on the internal wizbang search function being inop. It used to work well during CBSgate, but then Kev did something technical and that search function disappeared. I e-mailed him at the time requesting it back, and he then later added a “Google search within wizbang” function, but it still only seems to get the main posts, and not the contents of the comments. It would be nice if one could reference earlier data more easily for the latecomers who honestly want to know.
PS for lulu – I’m a proud Camel smoker 🙂
Non-filtered 🙂
Toby – how interesting about the Mau Mau concept eventually evolving into an expression of hollow extortion threats here in the 60s. It was a very real threat in my childhood. (I remember the men in the family watching a black and white documentary that we children were not allowed to see – I peeked in when the door was accidentally left open for a moment, and my mother muttering something about ghastly stuff of men’s “toy-toys” being cut off by the Mau Mau; my dad buying his first gun and talking about erecting a steel door within our home, which plans worried my greatly since my bedroom seemed to be outside the perimeter of his steel door plans! And short triangular beards were supposedly the Mau Mau’s trademark, so it got quite scary when I noticed my friend, our gardener, started growing such a beard.) The Mau Mau atrocities did not reach our city, but farmers up north and especially in Kenya were victims. Mostly it was black on black.
During my childhood, I wasn’t aware of the Vietnam War or the nuclear threat under which you all lived, but Russian and Chinese communist-inspired terrorism was real in Africa.
BR, I wanted to hear more about your life in Africa sometime. That has to be fascinating. Did you see my post about MauMau’ing?
Tob
Wow, ask and you shall receive. We are in sync.
Tob
I have never been to Africa but I wish to one day. I did date a girl from South Africa once though. She was different and interesting. 😉
Tob
Wow! 🙂
Yes Toby, I expected you to dismiss my last post and you did not disappoint. You left out, “Harrumph!” Okay, so dismiss this messenger. I understand. But If you care about the future of America, this division among it’s citizens should matter to you. It should matter to everyone. It is the poison that will lead to the eventual death of a great nation.
Lulu, you came in here like a rabid dog, spewing venom. Then all of a sudden you flipped and became Miss Reasonable – but still grossly misrepresenting. Don’t lecture us on divisiveness. Go empty your poison pen elsewhere.
“Yes Toby, I expected you to dismiss my last post and you did not disappoint. You left out, “Harrumph!” Okay, so dismiss this messenger. I understand. But If you care about the future of America, this division among it’s citizens should matter to you. It should matter to everyone. It is the poison that will lead to the eventual death of a great nation.”
Always happy to oblige. It is indeed easy to dismiss you as a messenger when your message is just more of the same, and I prefer to use Feyh!, with a limp-wristed flip of dismissal, to Harrumph anyway. Divisions come and they go. I’ve lived long enough to have seen us much more divided than this. Its just that fringers like yourself were dismissed by everyone as the MSM had no incentive to give you a megaphone when a democrat was president. Great nations die slowly. Doubtless, when the current danger has passed, the people will reconsider electing representative from the ‘Mommy party’. We survived Carter and Clinton, we’ll survive whoever does eventually get elected from the reformed Democratic party.
Tob
1994,1996,1998,2000,2002,2004…Read ’em and weep, Chomsky.
So BR and Tob, you prefer divisiveness? So then these types of message boards ARE simply a format in which to vent and nothing more. Seems rather pointless to maintain a pulpit where one simply preaches to the choir. Why sit around and pour so much time and energy into listening to an echo? Yes, BR, I was angry when I got here. For the very reasons that I point out above. Whenever entering a discussion with any civility, I was bashed just as quickly as if I’d entered throwing poo. I proved for myself that it doesn’t matter. Every issue is an “us against them” proposition. Neither side is willing to listen to the other. Enjoy your circle jerk. And check out today’s WaPo article, “U.S. Lowers Sights On What Can Be Achieved In Iraq: Administration is Shedding ‘Unreality’ That Dominated Invasion, Official Says.”
“So BR and Tob, you prefer divisiveness?”
I don’t prefer divisiveness, I’ve just come to expect it from the so-called tolerant wing of politics.
“Whenever entering a discussion with any civility, I was bashed just as quickly as if I’d entered throwing poo.”
Perhaps, we’re more perceptive than you thought, or your true nature just can’t be hidden.
“Enjoy your circle jerk.”
And ad hominem potty-mouth to boot. Also to be expected.
“check out today’s WaPo” everyday babe. And the NYT as well. It’s important to keep up with the buzz from the liberal hive-mind to get the current memes of the ‘herd of independent thinkers’.
Tob
1994,1996,1998,2000,2002,2004…and 2006 ain’t looking too good either, Chomsky.
RE: lulu’s post (August 12, 2005 04:10 PM)
So in an attempt to initiate a positive atmosphere and entice reasonable debate, you introduced yourself into this thread with the following:
It’s amazing and pretty darned amusing how frightened conservatives are of this former Catholic Youth Minister and Mom, Cindy Sheehan. All the press she is generating has got you folks pretty freaked out, from the looks of the previous posts. Now THAT”S entertainment! So just stay freaked out and yell really loud because it just means more press about this. And by the way, it’s a tad early to be declaring any kind of victory for Rove since the Federal Grand Jury investigation isn’t over until October. Yes, Bushbots, you SHOULD be scared. Your house of cards is crumbling, one cowardly criminal at a time. (lulu at August 12, 2005 04:10 PM)
You then adopted the sarcastically worded standard from jim b as truth and appended (by prejudicial convenience?) the anti-Rove meme, wholly irrelevant to the Sheehan topic. Here’s jim b again:
Bush is stoked about this Sheehan thing…It has cleaned the slate of his last F-up…Karl Rove, and as far as I can see it was either a mother with one less child, or raising the TERROR ALERT. We are fucked already so…. Bush in ’08! (jim b at August 12, 2005 03:09 PM)
Now who exactly is lamenting divisiveness? Are you subsequently complaining that turnabout is not fair play? You did not “…enter[ this] discussion with any civility” so dispense with the fallacy. You want debate, you’ll get debate… but you’ll get it on the terms you dictate from tenor and tone. Spare the lecture.
What I find fascinating is the cult-like atmosphere that is developing around Cindy Sheehan:
http://angrygwn.mu.nu/archives/111919.php
http://angrygwn.mu.nu/archives/111806.php
Like all cults, she is breaking off her ties with her family:
http://angrygwn.mu.nu/archives/111632.php
http://angrygwn.mu.nu/archives/111900.php
http://angrygwn.mu.nu/archives/111865.php
http://angrygwn.mu.nu/archives/111787.php
Spooky part, she’s buying into it:
http://angrygwn.mu.nu/archives/111872.php
Thank you for your reasonable, non-hysterical comments
No, lulu, they were hysterical, but thank you anyway.
I’d like to think it could be a forum in which people on both sides of an issue could connect
Again – Good luck. It’s become a political issue…
…sonofabitch I just spilled beer all over m keboard!!~
Why is all the blame being put on the President??
If I remember correctly, Congress UNANIMOUSLY voted to go to war in Iraq. Everybody seems to forget about that part. After September 11th, the whole country was screaming for vengence. Now everybody all of a sudden doesn’t want to face the facts that this is exactly what we asked for. Now that our men and women are overseas dying in a foreign land because of a radical religious movement (Islam) wants to destroy everyone who doesn’t believe as they do (the rest of us). And dont try to say Islam is a religion of peace. I know for a fact that the Quaran’s two largest chapters are ‘on fighting’ and ‘on war’. If that’s peace, then I’m Dick Tracey!
Furthermore, Casey Sheehan re-enlisted VOLUNTARILY AFTER the war was already on. Our military is an ALL VOLUNTEER force!! There are legal ways to get out of the militry once you are in; if someone doesn’t want to go to war, they can get out of it. Casey Sheehan obviously thought that it was the best choice to go to Iraq, otherwise, he wouldn’t have enlisted. The only thing that can be said if he DID re-enlist and didnt want to go to war is that he was a spineless sheep, who followed the rest of his friends into battle. I dont think anybody in our military is spineless – quite the contrary, they’re much braver than the average citizen and can withstand greater mental and physical stress. Casey was there because he CHOSE to be there. Tell his momma to shut the fuck up and go home and greive like the rest of us who have lost loved ones in this war. She’s disgracing her son, and the rest of our fallen soldiers. She disgraces us all. Love it or leave it.
The URL in which Cindy Sheehan says a former friend doctored an email is at
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cindy-sheehan/camp-casey-day-12_b_5830.html
This specter who is according to her, a “former friend” and just happens to be anti-Israel, is of course never named. I am under the impression that this person is none other than Cindy Sheehan herself. Also if you will notice David Dukes is supporting her all the way. Dukes just wrote an article entitled ” Why Cindy Sheehan is Right” its full of the usual anti-semitic invective that he has perfected over the years. Here are some quotes fron David Dukes article.
David Dukes– ” Recently, she had the courage to state the obvious that her son signed up in the military to protect America not to die for Israel.”
David Dukes–” In truth, Cindy Sheehan is absolutely right. Her son signed up in the military to defend America, not Israel.”
David Dukes wrote in his August 14 article that Cindy Sheehan was right in saying that her son didn’t join the military to protect Israel. Since August 14th Cindy Sheehan says that email to Nightline was “doctored by a former friend”. Why doesnt a reporter just ask Cindy Sheehan who this mystery person is who she calls her former friend and who framed her? Also why would anyone need to frame Cindy Sheehan with anti-semitic remarks when she freely does a great job at that all on her own?