Cindy Sheehan resigns as War Protest "leader"

Roufuss

Roufuss

CAGiversary!
Feedback
102 (100%)
Says she just wants to go back to being normal.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18919775?GT1=9951

I do agree with this though:

“Casey died for a country which cares more about who will be the next American Idol than how many people will be killed in the next few months while Democrats and Republicans play politics with human lives,” she wrote. “It is so painful to me to know that I bought into this system for so many years and Casey paid the price for that allegiance. I failed my boy and that hurts the most.”
Click to expand...

She's selling Camp Casey too.
 
I agree with the quoted part 100%, but they never pointed a gun at her son and told him to sign up. That was my biggest issue with her.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']I agree with the quoted part 100%, but they never pointed a gun at her son and told him to sign up. That was my biggest issue with her.[/QUOTE]

I wonder if he believed in what he was doing? If he did, then she's undermining and disrespecting the sacrifice he made by riding his death as an anti-war train(essentialy by passing it off as he died for something he staunchly objected to).
 
I dislike Bush and the whole Iraq war but I never saw any good coming out of protesting. I'm just a little bit disenchanted with the whole system...
 
[quote name='VanillaGorilla']Of course she's resigning, she wants to get back in the news, and this is the only way to do it.[/QUOTE]
I have to question her motives... it seems like this is all about her, and her name, than it is about her son, or the troops.
 
[quote name='Brak']I have to question her motives... it seems like this is all about her, and her name, than it is about her son, or the troops.[/quote]Of all the Cindy Sheehan stuff I've heard and read, honestly, this thread is the first one to actually mention the name of her son.

"My name is CINDY SHEEHAN, and I hate the WAR and PRESIDENT BUSH. Oh yeah, and my son Casey died in this war, which I, CINDY SHEEHAN, am opposed to!"
 
[quote name='VanillaGorilla']Of all the Cindy Sheehan stuff I've heard and read, honestly, this thread is the first one to actually mention the name of her son.

"My name is CINDY SHEEHAN, and I hate the WAR and PRESIDENT BUSH. Oh yeah, and my son Casey died in this war, which I, CINDY SHEEHAN, am opposed to!"[/QUOTE]
Out of all of the media I've seen her in, I've yet to hear her son's name or how he even died.

That newspiece is the first I've seen his name mentioned.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']I agree with the quoted part 100%, but they never pointed a gun at her son and told him to sign up. That was my biggest issue with her.[/QUOTE]

No, but they did say that he was going to Iraq because of the huge, immanent threat from Saddam Hussein and his partner Osama Bin Laden, claiming he would use his vast supply of nukes to destroy London or New York in 40 minutes using his amazing balsa wood unmanned air force.

Sheehan's biggest problem was she got off topic. If she just played her part and harped on Bush to answer her questions (which he never would) she would have had a more considerable impact. But her handlers started having her speak out on the Palestinian/Israeli conflict, photo ops with Chavez, yada, yada, yada. I feel bad for her, she started out with legitimate heartfelt issues and wound up getting used.

Her plot of land in Crawford, Camp Casey, is named after her son. If you followed her story even a little it was hard to miss her son's name, she said it every time I saw her on the tube. She can't be held responsible because you missed it.
 
[quote name='Cheese']No, but they did say that he was going to Iraq because of the huge, immanent threat from Saddam Hussein and his partner Osama Bin Laden, claiming he would use his vast supply of nukes to destroy London or New York in 40 minutes using his amazing balsa wood unmanned air force.

Sheehan's biggest problem was she got off topic. If she just played her part and harped on Bush to answer her questions (which he never would) she would have had a more considerable impact. But her handlers started having her speak out on the Palestinian/Israeli conflict, photo ops with Chavez, yada, yada, yada. I feel bad for her, she started out with legitimate heartfelt issues and wound up getting used.

Her plot of land in Crawford, Camp Casey, is named after her son. If you followed her story even a little it was hard to miss her son's name, she said it every time I saw her on the tube. She can't be held responsible because you missed it.[/QUOTE]

Actually she mentioned him often for about the first 2 weeks, then like you said she sold out. I can't feel sorry for her really though. She only has herself to blame for being overrun by her "handlers" as you call them. She was the one that welcomed them into "Camp Casey" originally to grab all the attention she could anyhow. Attention to her cause was good at first, but as they say in be careful who you ally yourself with because they often don't have your best interests in mind. Also, I think one reason she faded away is because everytime she speaks now and even then somewhat she sounds like an arrogant bitch. Originally her story was touching, but now she can't even bow out of her crusade without tossing an insult to people in there (though it may have a ring of truth). America was tocuhed by her plight originally but when everyone found out she was greedy, took her eye off the prize, let others control her actions, and finally showed everyone what she's really like by being filled with venom more than resolve for actual peace. Now, I think the country would actually pay more attention to reruns of America's Got Talent than they would her.

Edit: changed "when she got" to "when everyone found out". Why? Because IMO she was always those things.
 
If Sheehan is an "arrogant bitch" then you are a fucking asshole. She went through some horrible things from losing a son, to being maligned by every right-winger in the country, health problems, death threats, you name it. Yet she's is the bad person.

I always thought he quest to meet Bush in person was tilting at windmills. But at the core, she was just a mother struggling to understand why her son died. I can't fault her for that one bit.

I heard her on Randi Rhodes yesterday. In the first 10 secs she mentioned Casey.

(Not that they are on the same level, But I would hate to see how you guys would've reacted to MLK. "That negro just likes to her himself talk)
 
This is how I view the whole situation:

Casey joined the army, nobody forced him to do so. Joining in such a time, there's a very good chance of being deployed; he knew the risks, as I'm sure Cindy did too. She supported him, his decision, his cause, etc. She was probably just totally sure he would come back without harm, despite him going to war. When he died by a surprise ambush instead, she went crazy.

Let's change the scenario a bit. Casey's about to go on a roadtrip. He's all excited, and Cindy's happy for him because he's going to have lots of fun, yada yada. A week later, Casey is just driving along and is broad-sided unexpectantly by a semi-truck and is killed. Would she go crazy and become an anti-driving activist?

It's all in perspective here. Both she and Casy knew there were very real risks but when something happened to him, she decided to go all activist and act like his decision to join the army had no part in his death, that he had absolutely no role in it.
 
[quote name='deathweasel']This is how I view the whole situation:

Casey joined the army, nobody forced him to do so. Joining in such a time, there's a very good chance of being deployed; he knew the risks, as I'm sure Cindy did too. She supported him, his decision, his cause, etc. She was probably just totally sure he would come back without harm, despite him going to war. When he died by a surprise ambush instead, she went crazy.

Let's change the scenario a bit. Casey's about to go on a roadtrip. He's all excited, and Cindy's happy for him because he's going to have lots of fun, yada yada. A week later, Casey is just driving along and is broad-sided unexpectantly by a semi-truck and is killed. Would she go crazy and become an anti-driving activist?

It's all in perspective here. Both she and Casy knew there were very real risks but when something happened to him, she decided to go all activist and act like his decision to join the army had no part in his death, that he had absolutely no role in it.[/quote]

Let's change the scenario a bit. Casey goes off to fight WW2 and gets killed while liberating a grateful Europe from a group of Fascist thugs. The entire nation, focused on supporting the war effort, sympathizes with Cindy's plight and the vast majority of Americans believe that he died while fighting for a noble cause. Would she "go crazy" and become a pacifist at all costs, including surrender to imperialists?
 
I can't tell if you're mocking me or what...

The entire nation, focused on supporting the war effort, sympathizes with Cindy's plight and the vast majority of Americans believe that he died while fighting for a noble cause.
Click to expand...

That seems a bit contradictory. If the whole nation sympathizes with Cindy but believes that he died fighting for a noble cause... so they agree with her irrational hatred of our troops and the Bush administration because her son died in service, but they also agree that his defense of our country from those who would kill us or change our ways was a noble sacrifice?

Would she "go crazy" and become a pacifist at all costs, including surrender to imperialists?
Click to expand...

I would hope not, but probably, seeing as how she's done it already.
 
[quote name='deathweasel']I can't tell if you're mocking me or what...



That seems a bit contradictory. If the whole nation sympathizes with Cindy but believes that he died fighting for a noble cause... so they agree with her irrational hatred of our troops and the Bush administration because her son died in service, but they also agree that his defense of our country from those who would kill us or change our ways was a noble sacrifice?



I would hope not, but probably, seeing as how she's done it already.[/quote]

It was a hypothetical situation about our nation's attitude and justification for fighting in WW2 (you know - Axis, Allies, fighting Nazis - AKA that war from the "Medal of Honor" games)

Question though - where did Cindy say she hated the troops? (sources please)
 
I understand that, you pompous little... I just couldn't tell if you were mocking me or not.

She may not have specifically said in these exact words, "I hate our troops," that I know of, but her whole tirade is undermining what they have accomplished and shows a complete lack of disrespect for them and her son.
 
[quote name='deathweasel']I understand that, you pompous little... I just couldn't tell if you were mocking me or not.

She may not have specifically said in these exact words, "I hate our troops," that I know of, but her whole tirade is undermining what they have accomplished and shows a complete lack of disrespect for them and her son.[/QUOTE]
Logical fallacy there, buddy: protesting the war does not equal undermining the troops.
 
[quote name='deathweasel']Maybe I worded it a bit harshly... it's been a rough day at work.

Maybe not hate; but disrespect.[/quote]

I didn't see Cindy do anything but argue against the reasons for going into this war and the politicians who continue to support it.

She didn't call the soldiers baby-killers, she didn't spit in their faces or pull a "Hanoi Jane".

There is no silent majority supporting this war, it continues to chug on because (as Bush puts it) elections have consequences and executive power is at an all-time high. I'm really wondering how long this "support the troops" nonsense can go on, thank the gods that the mainstream newspapers have started publishing the faces of servicemen who lost their lives in this war.
 
[quote name='camoor'] thank the gods that the mainstream newspapers have started publishing the faces of servicemen who lost their lives in this war.[/QUOTE]

That's complete bullshit. The familes of that soldier and the soldier themselves have the right to not be paraded around like Lindsay Lohan when they die.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']That's complete bullshit. The familes of that soldier and the soldier themselves have the right to not be paraded around like Lindsay Lohan when they die.[/QUOTE]



at least they are being mentioned instead of pushed into a statistic on how many people were killed on a certain day
 
[quote name='Ikohn4ever']at least they are being mentioned instead of pushed into a statistic on how many people were killed on a certain day[/QUOTE]

If it was the families' choice to do that, I wouldn't have a problem with it. But it isn't.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']If it was the families' choice to do that, I wouldn't have a problem with it. But it isn't.[/QUOTE]


I am not talking about using them as a political point, i am talking about a way to honor them. I see headlines of 5 killed one day, 8 killed another. You lose the human aspect of it. You just see numbers. These people are dying and most people dont notice or dont care. Either way these people are being sacrificed for democracy or for stubbornness and their faces and names should be out there so we never forget the sacrifices they made, while we go about our normal lives.
 
[quote name='Ikohn4ever']I am not talking about using them as a political point, i am talking about a way to honor them. [/QUOTE]

But putting them on the Washington Post or NY Times does make it a political point, whichever way the wind is blowing up the editor's ass at the moment. It brings even more attention to the family than they want. Especially when nutjobs decide they will use the opportunity to protest at their funerals (which has been done).

It's fine to humanize the losses, but it should be done in a different way.
 
I don't think Lindsey Lohan has been on the cover of the New York Times, or the Washington Post. Now the NY Post, sure.

Fred Phelps is the only nutjob protesting funerals, and there's only 26 people in his flock (all his family members). So, he can't make it to all of the funerals. For him I think it's a logistics thing, he'll go to whatever ones he can get to, the faces being on the cover of a newspaper isn't going to influence him either way.
 
It's sad the even mentioning the dead means "it's political". It is also hugely presumpuious to think that all the families resent being noted in the paper. I would guess it is the opposite.

I don't think we could be more detached from this war.

It's fine to humanize the losses, but it should be done in a different way.
Click to expand...

In country music lyrics?
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']But putting them on the Washington Post or NY Times does make it a political point, whichever way the wind is blowing up the editor's ass at the moment. It brings even more attention to the family than they want. Especially when nutjobs decide they will use the opportunity to protest at their funerals (which has been done).

It's fine to humanize the losses, but it should be done in a different way.[/QUOTE]

Well, the soldiers are public servants, and they are over there trying to achieve the geopolitical goals of the Bush administration, so of course their deaths are political. Whether or not they agreed with it, these soldiers are dying in pursuit of a geopolitical policy.

If you think naming the public servants who died for this policy in some way threatens the legitimacy of it -- which to me reads that the policy wasn't worth dying for -- then perhaps you should rethink your support of it.

Otherwise, be happy that these soldiers are getting their names mentioned, so that we can thank each of them personally for their sacrifice for the geopolitical strategies of the Bush administration.
 
I realize this is getting to be old news but she "failed her boy" the minute she dragged his dignity through the streets and onto the news.

Good people die lady, I was a Marine for four years, I saw it. If it had been me, I sure as shit wouldn't have wanted my parents to do what that crazy bitch did.
 
[quote name='Halo05']I realize this is getting to be old news but she "failed her boy" the minute she dragged his dignity through the streets and onto the news.

Good people die lady, I was a Marine for four years, I saw it. If it had been me, I sure as shit wouldn't have wanted my parents to do what that crazy bitch did.[/QUOTE]

Just wanted to say, thank you for your service.
 
[quote name='Halo05']I realize this is getting to be old news but she "failed her boy" the minute she dragged his dignity through the streets and onto the news.

Good people die lady, I was a Marine for four years, I saw it. If it had been me, I sure as shit wouldn't have wanted my parents to do what that crazy bitch did.[/QUOTE]

What he said -- thank you for your service.

However, you must admit he died in part so that she would have the right to express her grief as she sees fit, and to demand accountability from her leaders for his death.

Also, to assume what he would think about his mother's reaction to his death is rather arrogant. Who's to say he wouldn't be cheering her on? Who's to say she's stripped him of an ounce of his dignity? He died in service to his country, and I don't think I've heard anyone demean that.
 
[quote name='dennis_t']What he said -- thank you for your service.

However, you must admit he died in part so that she would have the right to express her grief as she sees fit, and to demand accountability from her leaders for his death.

Also, to assume what he would think about his mother's reaction to his death is rather arrogant. Who's to say he wouldn't be cheering her on? Who's to say she's stripped him of an ounce of his dignity? He died in service to his country, and I don't think I've heard anyone demean that.[/QUOTE]

I believe her antics caused her husband to divorce her. I wonder if she blames that on the death of her son too?
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']I believe her antics caused her husband to divorce her. I wonder if she blames that on the death of her son too?[/QUOTE]

I would imagine that the divorce is far more likely to do with publicity, particularly negative publicity (just look at the venom people in this thread have for the woman), than with her particular stance.

It could be a combination of factors. It could be nothing - I've not heard anything about their divorce at all (not that it's any of our business).
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I would imagine that the divorce is far more likely to do with publicity, particularly negative publicity (just look at the venom people in this thread have for the woman), than with her particular stance.

It could be a combination of factors. It could be nothing - I've not heard anything about their divorce at all (not that it's any of our business).[/QUOTE]

Her husband divorced her because of what she was doing. At any rate, I would think it is ok for us to presume her son would not have wanted her to ruin her marriage over him. Any reasonable person would.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']Her husband divorced her because of what she was doing. At any rate, I would think it is ok for us to presume her son would not have wanted her to ruin her marriage over him. Any reasonable person would.[/QUOTE]

That's only a reasonable assumption if she had "ruining her marriage" as a *goal*, and not as an unintended consequence. At that point, it becomes foolish conjecture to assume she intended to divorce from her husband.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']That's only a reasonable assumption if she had "ruining her marriage" as a *goal*, and not as an unintended consequence. At that point, it becomes foolish conjecture to assume she intended to divorce from her husband.[/QUOTE]

She did intend to go to any length to A)Stop the war, B)Get our troops home, C)Speak with Bush. As her son had to live (or not live) with the consequences of being a soldier, so shall she for the lengths she took to try and achieve her goals. By making her deceased son the focal point/reason of her goals, she ended her marriage (her husband wanted to let him rest in peace).

I might have gone a little weird/psycho if my child was killed like that, but the difference between her and myself is I'd go about it in a different way. I won't say she was wrong for protesting or trying to accomplish her goals, I think she did it in the wrong way. Actually, I wonder how she feels about everything considering her son is still dead, and we are still sending more. I won't say what she's done has meant nothing, but what has it meant?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top