Largest Anti-War Protest

[Rex Kickass]

What was Sheehan arrested for?

 

Apparently standing in front of the White House and chanting.

 

So I think that'll be federal loitering charges.

[kapkomet]

Short answer, she didn't have a permit. It's a misdemeanor.

 

Personally, if you have an issue, and obtain the proper permits to protest, protest away. She made it a point to get arrested to garner the attention, and I guaran-damn-tee you that she was paid to do it.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Ah yes, lets compare a mother protesting a war in Washington D.C. to an actress pretending to fire North Vietnamese guns in Hanoi while visiting the enemy during a war.

 

That seems apt.  :rolly

 

 

You're thinking of Jane Fonda......

[Texsox]

You're thinking of Jane Fonda......

 

Do you have the Vets Aren't Fonda Jane bumper sticker?

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Do you have the Vets Aren't Fonda Jane bumper sticker? 

 

 

No. I just hate that f***ing b****. Intensely.

[Texsox]

Short answer, she didn't have a permit.  It's a misdemeanor.

 

Personally, if you have an issue, and obtain the proper permits to protest, protest away.  She made it a point to get arrested to garner the attention, and I guaran-damn-tee you that she was paid to do it.

 

So Kap, you think she's in this for the money and it's not about losing her son? :headshake

 

Save this thread and when your kid is old enough to serve his country, pull it out and see if your opinion changes.

[Balta1701]

So Kap, you think she's in this for the money and it's not about losing her son? 

In all honesty...there's a good chance that she could make a ton on the lecture circuit right now if she wanted to.

[Texsox]

In all honesty...there's a good chance that she could make a ton on the lecture circuit right now if she wanted to.

 

She toiled in obscurity for a year, protesting. She stood by herself near the Crawford Ranch, trying to draw attention, and finally got the audience she had hoped for. I doubt she thought, hey my son is dead, how can I make some money off of this? Whether I agree with her or not, I believe her motive is love for her son not money.

[KipWellsFan]

In all honesty...there's a good chance that she could make a ton on the lecture circuit right now if she wanted to.

 

You probably already knew Balta but she has signed to do speaking tours.

[Rex Kickass]

You're thinking of Jane Fonda......

 

Kap called her

 

Cindy 'Jane Hanoi' Sheehan.

 

just to clarify

[EvilMonkey]

So Kap, you think she's in this for the money and it's not about losing her son?  :headshake

 

Save this thread and when your kid is old enough to serve his country, pull it out and see if your opinion changes.

I belive it is a mix of both. While she probably started out over the grief of losing her son,, she has deformed into a self-serving, all-devouring media whore living off the attention she is getting by being outrageous. Her son was the hero here, not her.

[Texsox]

I belive it is a mix of both.  While she probably started out over the grief of losing her son,, she has deformed into a self-serving, all-devouring media whore living off the attention she is getting by being outrageous. Her son was the hero here, not her.

 

Do you think everyone has the skills to manage the media and the individuals that surround situations like this?

 

Did y'all think the Swifties were also media whores? They collected millions to tell their story?

[EvilMonkey]

Do you think everyone has the skills to manage the media and the individuals that surround situations like this?

 

Did y'all think the Swifties were also media whores? They collected millions to tell their story?

C'mon, Tex. She has practacly taken over Michael Moore's website. She doesn't have to know how to use the system, she has more than enough enablers to help her.

[Texsox]

C'mon, Tex.  She has practacly taken over Michael Moore's website.  She doesn't have to know how to use the system, she has more than enough enablers to help her.

 

That's what I'm saying. Not everyone could manage this situation. All of a sudden she is surrounded by famous people who seemingly care about her, her son, and her message. Imagine the machine in place to use someone like this? Look how many people lined up to have the Swifties on their shows? They were everywhere. Yet some seem to think she is manipulating the situation for her profit, not the other way around.

 

I don't think you can take the average person, put them into this giant pr machine, and have them handle the situation, I think she is being handled.

 

I don't think she took over the Moore website, I think they took her over.

[EvilMonkey]

Well, regardless of who took over who, she is sucking that teat for all it's worth. When the Moore-ons are done with her, she will end up a pathetic shell of a woman that noone will listen to, wondering where her 15-minutes went to.

 

As for the Swifties, I didn't recall seeing very much about them that was positive, unless you watched Fox or listened to Rush.

[Texsox]

Well, regardless of who took over who, she is sucking that teat for all it's worth.  When the Moore-ons are done with her, she will end up a pathetic shell of a woman that no one will listen to, wondering where her 15-minutes went to.

 

As for the Swifties, I didn't recall seeing very much about them that was positive, unless you watched Fox or listened to Rush.

 

I agree 100% I have a hard time imagining her manipulating Moore and the rest of that set.

 

Down here in Texas I didn't hear anything negative about the swifties. They were on every talk show, newspaper articles, and they played the commercials a few times. They had a story and the millionaire boys club lined up with tens of millions to tell their tale. I don't recall them being called media whore.

[Rex Kickass]

The Swifties were treated seriously. Even though they insulted the honor of a purple heart.

[southsider2k5]

That's what I'm saying. Not everyone could manage this situation. All of a sudden she is surrounded by famous people who seemingly care about her, her son, and her message. Imagine the machine in place to use someone like this? Look how many people lined up to have the Swifties on their shows? They were everywhere. Yet some seem to think she is manipulating the situation for her profit, not the other way around.

 

I don't think you can take the average person, put them into this giant pr machine, and have them handle the situation, I think she is being handled.

 

I don't think she took over the Moore website, I think they took her over.

 

And that was instantly used by the media to discredit the message that the Swifties were giving. They published the names of every rich rebublician who was funding them in the NYT. How come the same papers aren't mentioning that her primary funding is now coming from George Soros and Moveon.org? Isn't her funding just as relevant too?

[southsider2k5]

I agree 100% I have a hard time imagining her manipulating Moore and the rest of that set.

 

Down here in Texas I didn't hear anything negative about the swifties. They were on every talk show, newspaper articles, and they played the commercials a few times. They had a story and the millionaire boys club lined up with tens of millions to tell  their tale. I don't recall them being called media whore.

 

Sheehan isn't maniupluting anyone. She is being used by Moore, Soros, Kerry, and company...

[Texsox]

And that was instantly used by the media to discredit the message that the Swifties were giving.  They published the names of every rich rebublician who was funding them in the NYT.  How come the same papers aren't mentioning that her primary funding is now coming from George Soros and Moveon.org?  Isn't her funding just as relevant too?

 

Yes it is. But here is the fundamental difference. With the swifties there were facts that could be checked, they basically discredited the entire Purple Heart process, and all that jazz. With this woman, it's her opinion about ending the war. Since there is no underlying facts to challenge, the pro war groups are attacking her personally as a media whore and just in it for the money. She just doesn't seem that savvy. I can't believe she is using Moore et. al. They are masters of self promotion, she's a rank amateur. It is my belief that she just wants to preserve the memory of her son, has a sincere desire to see the war end quickly so more moms aren't watching their children be lowered into the ground.

 

Just like the swifties, there are well heeled individuals that see a story that the public can rally around and they are using that story to advance their beliefs.

 

Another big difference in my mind. The Swifties were out to elect a President, what is she out to do? Help end a war sooner? Which should receive greater scrutiny?

[southsider2k5]

Yes it is. But here is the fundamental difference. With the swifties there were facts that could be checked, they basically discredited the entire Purple Heart process, and all that jazz. With this woman, it's her opinion about ending the war. Since there is no underlying facts to challenge, the pro war groups are attacking her personally as a media whore and just in it for the money. She just doesn't seem that savvy. I can't believe she is using Moore et. al. They are masters of self promotion, she's a rank amateur. It is my belief that she just wants to preserve the memory of her son, has a sincere desire to see the war end quickly so more moms aren't watching their children be lowered into the ground.

 

Just like the swifties, there are well heeled individuals that see a story that the public can rally around and they are using that story to advance their beliefs.

 

Another big difference in my mind. The Swifties were out to elect a President, what is she out to do? Help end a war sooner? Which should receive greater scrutiny?

 

Just because there aren't facts to be checked, doesn't mean that her message gets off scott-free, without investigating whose paying her to talk. If you are getting funding from someone you are a lot more likely to be saying what you are told to say. Plus she HAS stated a LOT of opinions about Bush and the war, a lot more has been said than just bringing the boys home. She had made a ton of accusations and statements about the President and his administration.

 

Actually her aim is the exact same as the swifties in one respect, they want to make sure that someone DOESN'T get elected. They were trying to take down John Kerry, Sheehan and company are trying to take down George Bush, and by that, whoever is going to run for election to succeed Bush.

[Texsox]

Just because there aren't facts to be checked, doesn't mean that her message gets off scott-free, without investigating whose paying her to talk.  If you are getting funding from someone you are a lot more likely to be saying what you are told to say.  Plus she HAS stated a LOT of opinions about Bush and the war, a lot more has been said than just bringing the boys home.  She had made a ton of accusations and statements about the President and his administration.

 

Actually her aim is the exact same as the swifties in one respect, they want to make sure that someone DOESN'T get elected.  They were trying to take down John Kerry, Sheehan and company are trying to take down George Bush, and by that, whoever is going to run for election to succeed Bush.

 

Good points. You must be getting better coverage. I have not seen or heard her make any accusations like the Swifties, it's been all opinions. Have you seen any evidence that her opinions have changed since she is receiving a broader audience brought on by being surrounded by media? I haven't, but that would be very interesting. I also haven't seen or heard her talking about issues unrelated to the war. But I imagine it's only time until she is asked.

 

How is her position different that Rush, Hannity, Frankin, etc. They are true media whores, paid to state their opinions? Why don't we make the same arguments about them as we do private individuals like the Swifties and Sheehan? The EIB network pays Rush to make statements, should we assume that someone whose income is directly tied to their opinions would be more or less likely to bow to the corporate feeder?

 

And by stating "paying her to talk". Are you implying she is a spokes model handed a script and reads it no matter what. How exactly are the "paying her"? Right now it seems that the media is following her around and pointing microphones in her face. I heaven't seen any paid advertisements like the swifties. Kap mentioned she was paid to be arrested. I wonder if he means someone said if you get arrested I'll give you $10,000??

[EvilMonkey]

Tex, EIB doesn't tell Rush what to say, they just pay him to talk! As for casey's mom, there isn't a democratic talking point she hasn't made. It is like she has a crib sheet of everything ever said about Bush and republicans in general, and is just reciting them from memory. I am sure she didn't just come up with all this on her own. At some point, if her quest was really about her grief over her son, don't you think she would have told the move-on.org people to get lost, and that by them trying to join forces with her, they are bastardizing her message? She had sincerity when she was sitting in the ditch by herself. Once all the Bush-haters joined in, it has corrupted her message into just another political rally. As for her getting paid, what is she living on? Hubby divorced her because she is wacko, she isn't 'working', so she is getting money from somewhere.

[Texsox]

Tex, EIB doesn't tell Rush what to say, they just pay him to talk!  As for casey's mom, there isn't a democratic talking point she hasn't made.  It is like she has a crib sheet of everything ever said about Bush and republicans in general, and is just reciting them from memory.  I am sure she didn't just come up with all this on her own.  At some point, if her quest was really about her grief over her son, don't you think she would have told the move-on.org people to get lost, and that by them trying to join forces with her, they are bastardizing her message?  She had sincerity when she was sitting in the ditch by herself.  Once all the Bush-haters joined in, it has corrupted her message into just another political rally.  As for her getting paid, what is she living on?  Hubby divorced her because she is wacko, she isn't 'working', so she is getting money from somewhere.

 

How was she making it before the bandwagon got rolling? What would happen to Rush's rating if he suddenly started spouting liberal ideas? He's getting paid to chant the GOP party line. That's the show that EIB sells.

 

In various posts, you've said almost every GOP talking point, are you getting paid? I've hit almost all the DEM talking points and I'm not drawing a check from them. It doesn't surprise me that someone that opposed to the war would be sympathetic to other DEM causes, does it surprise you? Or is she really a conservative, against the war, and adopted the other views so she can hang with Moore?

 

If you had a cause that you really believed in and had your choice of telling it to dozens of people or linking with a GOP group and telling it to millions, which would you do? I think she is doing exactly what anyone would do. Grass roots, gathering steam, wider audience, different people.

 

But if someone could show how she changed her views once she hit the big time, I would change my mind in a heart beat. But until then, I don't see the for sale sign on her opinion.

 

What the money has done, as it always does in America, is bought credibility that should not be freely given. It bought a wider audience. It bought the media attention. Follow the money was the Watergate mantra, and modern day journalists have bastardized that to mean follow the story with the most money behind it.

[Controlled Chaos]

Some quotes I found regarding Cindy. I think she is as radical as they come and this is hardly about her son anymore.

 

 

Kopel: Sheehan's radical views little noted

 

Despite heavy coverage, nation's press strangely reluctant to report all she says

August 27, 2005

 

Cindy Sheehan claims the media are "a propaganda tool for the government." A New York Post editorial (Aug. 16) argued that Sheehan's statement was self-evidently false, given the overwhelming and almost exclusively positive media attention paid to her in the last several weeks. But in a broader sense, Sheehan has a point: Almost all the news stories and columns in Denver dailies, like the vast majority of the rest of the mainstream media, have failed to inform their readers about what Sheehan really thinks.

 

The night before Sheehan began her Crawford, Texas, vigil, she spoke at the convention of Veterans for Peace (transcript at www.veteransforpeace.org).She told the crowd about a sympathetic e-mailer who warned that her profanity offended "people on the fence."

 

In reply, she argued that anyone who supports the war should "get your a-- over to Iraq." Everyone against the war should "stand up and speak out. But whatever side you fall on, quit being on the fence . . . we have to get this country off their butts."

 

In other words, Sheehan's use of inflammatory rhetoric is an important part of her communication strategy. Yet even as the mainstream media has fawned over her campout, it has neutered her message, refusing to print her statements which are intended to get people off the fence.

 

For example, on Aug. 16, Sheehan held a media conference call during which she declared "The person who killed my son, I have no animosity for that person at all." Yet her statement was reported only in the National Review Online weblog. In an interview with Mark Knoller of CBS News, she explained that the foreigners who have to come to Iraq to battle the U.S. military are "freedom fighters." (Video at the anti-war Web site dc.indymedia. org/usermedia/video/2/cindyon bus.mov). Conversely, she described last January's vote in Iraq as a "sham election," in her Tuesday entry on her weblog on Michael Moore's Web site (http:// michaelmoore.com/mustread/ index.php?id=465).

 

Sheehan hopes that her strong words will get people off the fence, yet the mainstream media fails to report them. And until Friday's profile in the Rocky Mountain News, the only Denver daily articles to quote Sheehan's provocative words at even modest length were editorial page columns in the News - two by Mike Rosen and one by George Will, for a grand total of four paragraphs' worth of quotes. The Denver Post continues to shield its readers almost completely from Sheehan's fiery language and radical policy beliefs, as did a 25-paragraph profile of Sheehan in Friday's News.

 

In an Aug. 16 interview with Chris Matthews on Hardball, Sheehan explained that the invasion of Afghanistan was just as wrong as the invasion of Iraq, and she would be equally angry if her son had died in Afghanistan: "Why do we send in invading armies to march into Afghanistan when we're looking for a select group of people in that country?" Yet the news stories in the Denver papers never mention her belief about the immorality of the Afghanistan war.

 

Sheehan has explained that the real global terrorist problem is the United States. Speaking at San Francisco State University on April 27, she announced, "The biggest terrorist in the world is George W. Bush." Rebuking people (such as the Post editors who created the "Portraits of Valor" series) who claim that serving in the military is patriotic, she stated: "I'm going all over this country telling moms: 'This country is not worth dying for.' " She denounced the idea that soldiers should "defend this morally repugnant system we have." (Transcript at www.discoverthenet work.org/Articles/Stewartrally. htm.)

 

At the Veterans for Peace rally, Sheehan called George Bush a "lying bastard" and a "maniac." She showed her path to peace: "You get America out of Iraq and Israel out of Palestine and you'll stop the terrorism." (The Crawford "Peace" House, which Sheehan has used to coordinate her protest, has a photo on its Web site depicting "Palestine" as including the entire state of Israel. That Sheehan urges the extermination of the Jewish state does not necessarily mean that she is anti-Semitic; there are some extreme-left Jews who agree with her position.)

 

In an Aug. 11 blog conference call, Sheehan stated, "Thank God for the Internet, or we wouldn't know anything, and we would already be a fascist state." Even if one does not entirely agree, the last several weeks do show that that the mainstream media sometimes mislead the public by refusing to print statements that sharply challenge the status quo.