• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Let us savor the impending downfall of lawless scoundrels who richly deserve the trouble barreling their way.

Ron DeSantis, the grand wizard, oops, governor of FL

Why is it so hard for them to condemn hate?

If senate republicans had any shame, they’d die of it.

Our job is not to persuade republicans but to defeat them.

Republicans are the party of chaos and catastrophe.

Good lord, these people are nuts.

A last alliance of elves and men. also pet photos.

Speaking of republicans, is there a way for a political party to declare intellectual bankruptcy?

… riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact

They are lying in pursuit of an agenda.

Prediction: the GOP will rethink its strategy of boycotting future committees.

It’s a doggy dog world.

Republican obstruction dressed up as bipartisanship. Again.

There is no compromise when it comes to body autonomy. You either have it or you don’t.

Too often we hand the biggest microphones to the cynics and the critics who delight in declaring failure.

Glad to see john eastman going through some things.

“What are Republicans afraid of?” Everything.

Roe isn’t about choice, it’s about freedom.

Accountability, motherfuckers.

I’ve spoken to my cat about this, but it doesn’t seem to do any good.

I’d try pessimism, but it probably wouldn’t work.

if you can’t see it, then you are useless in the fight to stop it.

JFC, are there no editors left at that goddamn rag?

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Really- Just a Grieving Mother

Really- Just a Grieving Mother

by John Cole|  August 30, 20052:51 pm| 109 Comments

This post is in: General Stupidity

FacebookTweetEmail

Maha Cindy speaks:

While George golfed yesterday, the worst hurricane ever struck New Orleans; oil went up to over 68.00/barrel; and an American soldier was killed in the charade and cataclysmic occupation of Iraq. The soldier’s family doesn’t even know what’s going to hit them yet. The death is “Pending Notification.” I continually ask myself: “How do George Bush and other death-mongers live with themselves?” While George vacations and bikes and golfs his way to the lowest poll numbers since Richard Nixon, other “patriots” are wrapping themselves in the Stars and Stripes and going along with the farce that the mission from hell: Killing more people in Iraq, because so many have already been killed” is somehow a good thing ordained by God. I can live with myself, but trust me, sleep does not come easily to me these days.

I know, I know. I am not allowed to discuss her repellant and repugnant statements and opinions because she is a grieving mother.

*** Update ***

Sheesh. I didn’t know she met the President today (at least the only one some of you guys recognize). (h/t Jeff)

*** Update ***

Excellent! Mother Sheehan’s commercial was just on CNN. I hope they play it every ten minutes.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « The Levee Broke
Next Post: Katrina/New Orleans »

Reader Interactions

109Comments

  1. 1.

    BinkyBoy

    August 30, 2005 at 2:58 pm

    What makes her more repellant and repugnant than what every other anti-iraq war liberal has said?

    I’ve said much worse at times. Abu-Ghraib brought out the worst in people.

    And by the way, what she’s refering to is someone in the administration saying that “pulling out would be a disservice to those that have sacrificed their lives” or something like that. You know that Republican line, John, so give up your high seat and come down and look at Ms. Sheehan without the hatred the right has imbued in you.

  2. 2.

    Defense Guy

    August 30, 2005 at 3:04 pm

    Binkyboy as usual can only find examples of bad acts committed by Americans. The videotaped beheadings, not worth outrage. The videotaped shooting of a downed helicopter pilot, hell probably justified. Everything must be cast in the light of being OUR fault, and any murderous or henous act committed against innocent Iraqi’s is painted as a response to our aggression. Is it true? Who cares, they are working up a head of rightous indignation at the eeeeeeevil Chimpy McHalliburton. No one is entitled to any other opinon, and if they have one you must slam them for the evil bastards they are.

    Is there only outrage to be had AT America, or can you for one freaking second understand that we are the good guys, that Republicans are not imbued with some evil intent bent on world subjugation and that Ms. Sheehan is ONLY ONE voice of those who have lost a son or daughter.

  3. 3.

    jg

    August 30, 2005 at 3:05 pm

    Can I ask why Bush is visting california giving speeches comparing Iraq with WWII while New Orleans is taking the road to Atlantis without being aligned with Sheehan? Isn’t that a valid question to ask of our president at this time?

  4. 4.

    M.A.

    August 30, 2005 at 3:06 pm

    Yeah, I don’t see what’s particularly repellent about it — angrier and shrill-er than some of us wimpy types may like, but the basic sentiment — that people are dying in Iraq for no good reason — is pretty mainstream.

  5. 5.

    Defense Guy

    August 30, 2005 at 3:13 pm

    but the basic sentiment—that people are dying in Iraq for no good reason—is pretty mainstream.

    No, it isn’t. There is growing dissatisfaction with the war, but why is oddly never polled.

  6. 6.

    M.A.

    August 30, 2005 at 3:15 pm

    Is there only outrage to be had AT America, or can you for one freaking second understand that we are the good guys,

    Just because others are worse doesn’t make us the “good guys.” We are up against some bad guys, and we are not bad guys ourselves, but we’re hardly good guys — anti-heroes, let’s say, with good intentions but making things worse instead of better. Anyway, the obvious point is that we criticize Americans more often because we can theoretically influence American policy. I’ll gladly admit that the insurgents and Saddam and so on are much worse, but they don’t care what Americans think of them.

    that Republicans are not imbued with some evil intent bent on world subjugation

    Well, a lot of the people who supported this invasion basically did believe, and say outright, that it’s good for America to be the sole unchallenged superpower and expand its influence in the Middle East. It’s not an “evil intent bent on world subjugation,” but it’s close to a “GOOD intent bent on world subjugation,” and it’s a bad idea, doesn’t work, hurts America and should be abandoned.
    and that Ms. Sheehan is ONLY ONE voice of those who have lost a son or daughter.
    True ’nuff. That makes her wrong about the Iraq war because…?

  7. 7.

    M.A.

    August 30, 2005 at 3:19 pm

    “but the basic sentiment—that people are dying in Iraq for no good reason—is pretty mainstream.”

    No, it isn’t. There is growing dissatisfaction with the war, but why is oddly never polled.

    I think highly enough of the American people to think that they’d support the war if they thought there was a good reason for it. They’ve supported bloodier wars on that basis. Wars lose support when the original reasons for them no longer seem to make sense — as with Iraq.

    Americans are tougher than you think — as long as there’s a good reason to be tough. There’s no longer any reason beyond “stay the course.”

  8. 8.

    docG

    August 30, 2005 at 3:28 pm

    I’ll give you Cindy Sheehan can be attacked for stupid statements and raise you pointing out George Bush’s foolish adventurism in Iraq is in no way unpatriotic.

  9. 9.

    Otto Man

    August 30, 2005 at 3:32 pm

    Is there only outrage to be had AT America, or can you for one freaking second understand that we are the good guys

    Well, I tend to direct my concerns towards my country because it’s my country. It’s the one I have a stake in, the one I have representatives in, the one I plan to stick with ’til the end. I may get outraged over what other countries do, but I don’t really have a constitutional say in how they run things. I do have a right and, more importantly, a responsiblity to make my criticisms here in America.

    And yes, I understand we’re the good guys. Which is why I speak up when some in our ranks don’t act like the good guys. I’m a firm believer in the philosophy of “my country, right or wrong.” But I don’t take that in the simplistic “love it or leave it” attitude that phrase connoted in the 1960s. Instead, I take it in the original sense as put forth by Sen. Carl Schurz back in the nineteenth century. The full quotation is “My country, right or wrong. If right, to be kept right; if wrong, to be set right.”

    That’s a better attitude, in my opinion, than “My country: Not quite as bad as Saddam.”

  10. 10.

    Vladi G

    August 30, 2005 at 3:32 pm

    Man, Defense Guy is really getting desperate.

  11. 11.

    ppGaz

    August 30, 2005 at 3:33 pm

    I think “repellant” describes George Bush and his glib use of hyped fears, hypocritical “patriotism” and cynical use of 9-11 and concern about terrorism as devices for political manipulation.

    I think the man and his team of dunderheads who can’t shoot straight are repellant and repugnant and evil. No exaggeration for effect, I mean this exactly as written.

    The man is scum. He is dirt. He is a former alcoholic, a chickenhawk ne’er do well who has sunk this country into a war of his own choice for his own reasons and tried to pimp it as something else, with no real idea how to accomplish his stated goals. He apparently thinks that his “faith” and his razor-thin victories give him the authority to dismiss half of his own country and do as he damned well pleases. He therefore shows no respect for my half of this country, and I will show no respect for him in return.

    Cheers to Cindy Sheehan, and fuck George Bush and his stupid war.

  12. 12.

    Otto Man

    August 30, 2005 at 3:35 pm

    There is growing dissatisfaction with the war, but why is oddly never polled.

    That’s likely a result of the narrow approach of most pollsters. Once the numbers opposing the war become even more pronounced, they’ll start to plumb that for reasons why.

    But here’s something they have been polling, courtesy of the Washington Post:

    Slightly more than half of the country says President Bush should meet with Cindy Sheehan, the mother of a soldier killed last year in Iraq, who is leading a protest against the war outside Bush’s ranch in Crawford, Tex., according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

    The survey found that 52 percent of the public says Bush should talk to Sheehan, who has repeatedly asked for a meeting with the president, while 46 percent said he should not. Fifty-three percent support what she is doing while 42 percent oppose her actions, according to the poll.

    Boy, I can’t wait to hear why this is a sign that the country is growing tired of Sheehan or how she’s marginalizing the anti-war movement.

  13. 13.

    John Cole

    August 30, 2005 at 3:40 pm

    Hell, Otto. I think he should have talked to her and ended her insane ramblings. I also completely understand why he didn’t.

  14. 14.

    Jeff G

    August 30, 2005 at 3:40 pm

    Yeah, you’re right. Cindy has great appeal. Unless you know anything about her. The majority of those polled who even know who Sheehan is just think “grieving Mom.”

    But she’s working to change that.

    Keep talking, Cindy!

  15. 15.

    Joe Albanese

    August 30, 2005 at 3:47 pm

    Defense Guy said,

    can you for one freaking second understand that we are the good guys, that Republicans are not imbued with some evil intent bent on world subjugation

    Good guys? Thats it Defense Guy? we’re the good guys and everyone else are the bad guys? The simplistic arguments of the right are really something to behold.

    What makes us the “good guys”? I’ll tell you what makes us the “good guys” is that when we go off track (like when we torture prisoners in our care) and behave “not so good”, Americans rise up and start complaining. Protesting. Shouting. Writing letters to the ediotor, blogging, etc. We are not “good” because of some genetic pre-disposition to be good but because the country corrects itself over time – the wonderful benefits of being a free society with democratic values.

    So, my argument is that Cindy Sheehan, depite her admitted over the top rhetoric at times (not that anyone on the right would EVER do that) is part of what makes us the “good guys”. John and his ilk would like us to think the contrary but it ain’t working and that frustrates them more than anything else. Unless you think the American populus so ignorant, so dumb that they would just blindly follow what a Cindy Sheehan says (or an Ann Coulter, Rush limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mike Savage, Bill O’Reilly, Pat Robertson… etc. etc) then you should welcome her contribution to the dialogue the country seems to be engaged in regarding Iraq.

    Don’t be so afraid of democracy Defense Guy… psssst.. its what makes us the GOOD GUYS.

  16. 16.

    Defense Guy

    August 30, 2005 at 3:48 pm

    C’mon now, since we can’t change anything other than American evil imperialism, there really is no need to talk about any other country. In that light, St. Cindy is the perfect spokesperson, as she has all sorts of ‘self directed’ criticisms. Oh wait, isn’t her characterization as our enemies in Iraq as freedom fighters speaking of something outside her realm of control. How dare she?

  17. 17.

    Otto Man

    August 30, 2005 at 3:50 pm

    Hell, Otto. I think he should have talked to her and ended her insane ramblings.

    Oh, I know. But someone here was desperately clinging to the poll data that showed only 36% supported her protest, and 38% opposed it, or something like that. I was noting that the new data throws that out the window.

  18. 18.

    Defense Guy

    August 30, 2005 at 3:50 pm

    Yes Joe

    Between the government of the United States and the former government of Iraq or Afghanistan it really is easy to get confused as to who is the ‘good guy’. Excuse my right leaning simplicity.

  19. 19.

    M.A.

    August 30, 2005 at 3:52 pm

    Between the government of the United States and the former government of Iraq or Afghanistan it really is easy to get confused as to who is the ‘good guy’. Excuse my right leaning simplicity.

    You seem unable to grasp the concept that the person fighting the bad guy is not always necessarily a “good guy.” Haven’t you ever seen a movie without a clear-cut “good guy?”

  20. 20.

    Defense Guy

    August 30, 2005 at 3:55 pm

    M.A.

    Curious. So tell me, who exactly are you rooting for. 2 choices, the US and coalition or the contingent of ‘insurgants’?

  21. 21.

    BinkyBoy

    August 30, 2005 at 3:56 pm

    What “country” is cutting off heads? What “country” is sending out suicide bombers and car bombs?

    To DG, one Iraqi = ALL Iraqis. One Arab = ALL Arabs.

    Cindy Sheehan has brought to light a dialog that has been tiptoed around and you’re just upset about it. Give up, your arguments have all been refuted and YOU’RE the one that looks like a whiny baby at this point.

  22. 22.

    ppGaz

    August 30, 2005 at 3:57 pm

    I think he should have talked to her and ended her insane ramblings.

    She is, in the end, a single citizen with a beef.

    His insane ramblings are what we should be concerned about. He is the president, and his nutty, self-justifying ideas are a profound threat to millions of people and to this country. He’s a walking, talking disaster in motion.

    But of course, let’s focus on Cindy, as if she were the important thing here.

    This country is frozen around a war that this man created, folks. By all means, talk about Cindy. Whether you agree with the Chief Spud or not, his policies are the issue, not Cindy Sheehan.

  23. 23.

    Defense Guy

    August 30, 2005 at 3:58 pm

    OK BinkyBoy – I’ll give up. Ya’ll can have your dissent and I won’t criticize it any further. Enjoy it.

  24. 24.

    Joe Albanese

    August 30, 2005 at 3:59 pm

    Defense Guy:

    Between the government of the United States and the former government of Iraq or Afghanistan it really is easy to get confused as to who is the ‘good guy’. Excuse my right leaning simplicity.

    No, your simplicity comes in by suggesting that those of us that may believe that the war in Iraq is a huge blunder of historic proportions and one that that will hurt US interests for decades to come, are somehow on the side of “the former governments of Iraq or Afghanistan”.

    Not only is it simplistic, it is insulting.

  25. 25.

    ppGaz

    August 30, 2005 at 4:02 pm

    who exactly are you rooting for.

    Do you think you are watching a sporting event on tv?

    We’re unable to quell the insurgency largely because our strategy in there is not based on coping with an insurgency. It’s based on a flawed model that says we are still fighting the same war we were fighting in there in March 2003. The insurgents appear to be playing us like a drum. That’s probably one reason why support for this effort is sagging, because we are so inept at it.

    “Rooting?” What a fucking idiotic thing to say.

  26. 26.

    es

    August 30, 2005 at 4:02 pm

    I have no doubt Defense Guy, and many others, would be chanting “love it or leave it” if Bush nuked Iceland. Also, what Otto Man said at 3:32 should be standard reading for all the “we’re the good guys” people.

  27. 27.

    neil

    August 30, 2005 at 4:03 pm

    I find your opinion that she cannot be a political activist if she is a grieving mother to be insulting.

  28. 28.

    M.A.

    August 30, 2005 at 4:04 pm

    Curious. So tell me, who exactly are you rooting for. 2 choices, the US and coalition or the contingent of ‘insurgants’?

    Given those choices? The US and coalition, of course. But that doesn’t make them the “good guys.” Just the “not bad guys.” And that’s what you can’t seem to grasp: “Not as bad as Saddam” or “Not as bad as the terrorists” does not equal “good.”

    Sort of like many lefties who thought John Kerry was a corporate tool still voted for him because they thought he was less so than Bush. Or vice versa (people who thought Bush was a squishy closet liberal still preferred him to Kerry). Not the good guy, just the less-bad guy.

    Clear?

  29. 29.

    Mike

    August 30, 2005 at 4:05 pm

    “The man is scum. He is dirt. He is a former alcoholic, a chickenhawk ne’er do well who has sunk this country into a war of his own choice for his own reasons and tried to pimp it as something else, with no real idea how to accomplish his stated goals. He apparently thinks that his “faith” and his razor-thin victories give him the authority to dismiss half of his own country and do as he damned well pleases. He therefore shows no respect for my half of this country, and I will show no respect for him in return.”

    Half the country doesn’t go around saying ‘Fuck George Bush”, only a minority do that, the moonbats actually, and why would he ever want to listen to them.? Few do.

  30. 30.

    Another Jeff

    August 30, 2005 at 4:05 pm

    Why is it so hard for people to understand that pointing out that Cindy Sheehan is an obnoxious flake–and on about her 18th minute of fame–doesn’t automatically mean that you worship at the altar of President Bush, and it also doesn’t mean that you think everything in Iraq is peaches and cream.

    I know that’s a hard concept for some in the blogosphere to understand, but it’s fairly common in the real world.

  31. 31.

    M.A.

    August 30, 2005 at 4:09 pm

    Why is it so hard for people to understand that pointing out that Cindy Sheehan is an obnoxious flake—and on about her 18th minute of fame—doesn’t automatically mean that you worship at the altar of President Bush, and it also doesn’t mean that you think everything in Iraq is peaches and cream.

    Maybe because most of the things that are supposed to make her obnoxiously flaky are things that are perfectly mainstream — like the idea that there is no good reason for the Iraq war.

    She might well be a flake, and she does seem to mouth a lot of talking points — she’s clearly picked up a lot of ideas from lefty blogs, as a right-winger picks up talking points from Rush — but most the time, right-wingers are accusing her of being “flaky” for saying things that would make any war-opposer a “flake.” Which I suppose is the real point (not John Cole’s point, but certainly the point of a lot of people who want to pretend that opposition to the war is not mainstream).

  32. 32.

    BumperStickerist

    August 30, 2005 at 4:09 pm

    .” Haven’t you ever seen a movie without a clear-cut “good guy?”

    Good Will Hunting?

  33. 33.

    Fred

    August 30, 2005 at 4:12 pm

    M.A. wants, like a child, to have a choice between pure good, unalloyed by human frailties, and pure evil; or else he and his ilk are sitting this one out.

    Well, in the real world, you don’t get choices like that too often.

    Sorry.

    As for all this blather about polls, the only one that counts took place last November and M.A.’s side lost. Again.

    Deal with it.

  34. 34.

    sean

    August 30, 2005 at 4:13 pm

    John –
    Actually she met with Martin Sheen on Sunday.

  35. 35.

    Davebo

    August 30, 2005 at 4:14 pm

    So defense dude is crowing wildly about how the USA is better than Saddam or the Taliban.

    Talk about the silent bigotry of low expectations.

    And Another Jeff. John hasn’t just pointed out that he thinks Sheehan is an obnoxious flake.

    Hell he’s given her more run than the dreaded “mainstream media” has.

    And he looks really foolish doing it.

  36. 36.

    Joe Albanese

    August 30, 2005 at 4:14 pm

    Another Jeff:

    Why is it so hard for people to understand that pointing out that Cindy Sheehan is an obnoxious flake

    Why is it so hard for some people to understand that there are many of us that dont’ think she is an obnoxious flake. Some of us think that Ann Coulter is an obnoxious flake.. and Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity, and Bill O’reilly and Joe Scarborough and Mike Savage. All of those people have said far worse than anything Cindy has said. (I’ll give you ample proof if you want) AND they have the EAR of millions of Americans, every single day, through their respective forums supporting the war. But John only seems to find the “obnoxious flaky” comments of Cindy to highlight day after day.

  37. 37.

    ppGaz

    August 30, 2005 at 4:15 pm

    why would he ever want to listen to them

    To whom does he listen? Even his appearances in public are arranged and the audiences carefully cherry picked, lest some whisper of negativity sneak in the door. People are asked to leave if their car as a Kerry bumper sticker on it.

    Don’t talk to me about listening, talk to that sonofabitch cowardly president who is afraid to listen.

  38. 38.

    Andrei

    August 30, 2005 at 4:20 pm

    “I know, I know. I am not allowed to discuss her repellant and repugnant statements and opinions because she is a grieving mother.”

    Actually… I’m just wondering when you’ll get back to trying to have a real discourse on a real issue with regard to the war, because lately you’ve contributed very little that’s been useful.

  39. 39.

    alppuccino

    August 30, 2005 at 4:21 pm

    She is, in the end, a single citizen with a beef.

    Yes – a single citizen with a beef and an ice cream magnate sponsor.

    A single citizen with a beef, 2 ice cream magnate sponsors, one West Wing co-star,

    FIIIIIIIIVE Soundstage booms,

    4 kneeling chicks

    3 photogs

    2 network heads

    And a Sharpton in a liiimooo chaaaaase.

  40. 40.

    Another Jeff

    August 30, 2005 at 4:22 pm

    Joe Alabanese,

    I don’t need proof about any of the people you mentioned, because i happen to agree with you about Coulter, Limbaugh, Savage, and Hannity.

    See, here’s another thing that you and many others seem to have trouble grasping: Finding someone on the left to be obnoxious or annoying or generally full of shit doesn’t mean that i don’t think there aren’t people on the right that fit the same description. Shocking, isn’t it!!

  41. 41.

    Joe Albanese

    August 30, 2005 at 4:23 pm

    John Cole:

    I know, I know. I am not allowed to discuss her repellant and repugnant statements and opinions because she is a grieving mother.

    Isn’t that just precious? Poor John is attacked because we all think a “grieving mother” should be able to say whatever she wants. Huh? who is making that argument? She is an AMERICAN CITIZEN. Why do YOU John Cole have MORE of a right to talk about Iraq than her? You seem to think she has LESS right to speak her mind BECAUSE she is a grieving mother. Again, I know I sound like a broken record, but I’m going to keep highlighting the hypocrisy here, all the right wing blowhards say such absurd things. Outrageous things. On a daily basis. What is their SPECIAL right to pontificate on American policy?

  42. 42.

    A liberal

    August 30, 2005 at 4:25 pm

    Dear fascists on this site:

    I am a liberal.

    I would rather live as a slave on my knees…

    …then die on my feet as a warmonger.

    Cindy is better than Jesus and Rosa Parks. You are worse than Hitler.

    Fuck off.

    A liberal

  43. 43.

    jobiuspublius

    August 30, 2005 at 4:25 pm

    John, I don’t understand your facination with Cindy. Just look at the crew of lunatics you have here. What are you looking for in a voice of the people? Mark Twain?

  44. 44.

    Boronx

    August 30, 2005 at 4:25 pm

    John, why does Cindy burn you so much?

    I’d have thought your ability to swallow the repugnancy of sending almost 2000 young Americans to die half way around the world for a pack of lies would easily inure you to anything some little old lady might say to a reporter.

  45. 45.

    pmm

    August 30, 2005 at 4:27 pm

    Ppgaz, there’s a difference between listening and agreeing with–isn’t it possible that the President has heard your arguments and disagrees with them?

    Also, I find your opposition to the President to be rather personal in nature–I may be misreading you, but it’s not disrespectful just because he implements policies you disagree with. Otherwise, we aren’t respecting each other right now since we obviously disagree on a great many issues.

    Finally, I must take exception to this statement:

    “We’re unable to quell the insurgency largely because our strategy in there is not based on coping with an insurgency. It’s based on a flawed model that says we are still fighting the same war we were fighting in there in March 2003. The insurgents appear to be playing us like a drum.”

    Our order of battle, ROE, doctrine, mission, or strategies haven’t changed since we breached the berms? C’mon, ppgaz. You are mistaken on this.

  46. 46.

    Joe Albanese

    August 30, 2005 at 4:30 pm

    Finding someone on the left to be obnoxious or annoying or generally full of shit doesn’t mean that i don’t think there aren’t people on the right that fit the same description. Shocking, isn’t it!!

    but John has such OUTRAGE at Cindy. You can tell by the frequency and viciousness of his posts. But when it comes to the outrageous comments of the war supporters he.. well.. he just dont pay them no mind as he recently said about Ann Coulter. Fine, John, just don’t pay attention to Cindy. Perhaps you won’t get so many sinus headaches.

  47. 47.

    pmm

    August 30, 2005 at 4:30 pm

    Joe Albanese wrote:

    You seem to think she has LESS right to speak her mind BECAUSE she is a grieving mother.

    It’s not that Mrs. Sheehan doesn’t have the write to speak out, but that her opinions and statements should be received based on their merits, not on her status.

  48. 48.

    Boronx

    August 30, 2005 at 4:35 pm

    Attacking Sheehan is the only way these guys can defend the war, since they’ve failed on the merits.

    It’s sad that she’s the only person brave enough to stand up to george and ask why he’s destroying the military, weakening our national security, wasting billions of dollars, and killing tens of thousands of people, and why’d he lie about it.

    Much sadder still that there are whole legions of Americans who consider themselves patriots who are never the less ready to slam her at moments notice for the crime of telling the truth.

  49. 49.

    kyle

    August 30, 2005 at 4:35 pm

    What is it, exactly, that makes so many of you so sure that the war is a morass? That our tactics aren’t based on fighting an “insurgency?” MSM reporting? Jeebus, I hope not.

    Have you talked to any soldiers in the active theater recently? About how tactics actually *have* evolved over the past 18+ months? About growing cooperation between the coalition forces and pro-Iraqi…umm…Iraqis? Look into it. Broaden your horizons. I’ve heard what CINDY! and her krew have to say – howsa bout you open your mind to the other side as well?

    No? Well, why would you? It’s so much easier to be spoon-fed bad news, then parrot it out with a delightful leftvenom and caper sauce. And you kooks accuse the right of being single-minded. Sheesh.

    In other news…
    I think “repellant” describes George Bush and his glib use of hyped fears, hypocritical “patriotism” and cynical use of 9-11 and concern about terrorism as devices for political manipulation.

    I think the man and his team of dunderheads who can’t shoot straight are repellant and repugnant and evil. No exaggeration for effect, I mean this exactly as written.

    The man is scum. He is dirt. He is a former alcoholic, a chickenhawk ne’er do well who has sunk this country into a war of his own choice for his own reasons and tried to pimp it as something else, with no real idea how to accomplish his stated goals. He apparently thinks that his “faith” and his razor-thin victories give him the authority to dismiss half of his own country and do as he damned well pleases. He therefore shows no respect for my half of this country, and I will show no respect for him in return.

    Cheers to Cindy Sheehan, and fuck George Bush and his stupid war.
    Lefty boilerplate rant checklist:

    Right-wing patriotism = hypocrisy? Check
    Bush as evil manipulative genius? Check
    Bush as incompetent “dunderhead” Check
    Childish ad hominem attacks Check
    “Chickenhawk!” Check
    “War of choice” Check

    Wow…six in just one short post! Do we have a bingo? Anyone?

  50. 50.

    ppGaz

    August 30, 2005 at 4:39 pm

    there’s a difference between listening and agreeing with—isn’t it possible that the President has heard your arguments and disagrees with them?

    You miss the point. According to some major poll or the other a few days ago, 78% of respondents think that Iraq has either had no effect on our safety from terrorism, or has made us less safe (less, by about 2:1 within that group).

    78%! At what point does this little Lord Fauntleroy come down from his perch and allow as how his narrow view of all this may not be the only possible way to look at these things? At 78%, we are seeing the erosion of support of his core demographics.

    Never mind whether he “agrees with” them or not. This thread is about whether we are going to sit here and invite people to take dumps on Cindy Sheehan for speaking out for what is now the mainstream position of views on this war in this country.

    Personal? You are goodamned right it’s personal. This little piece of crap president is ruining this country, and I take that very personally, you can count on it.

  51. 51.

    Davebo

    August 30, 2005 at 4:39 pm

    When the reality of what’s happening around you just gets too depressing to deal with.

    When you realize that you were not only fooled, but made quite an obnoxious fool of yourself.

    When you know you screwed the pooch, but dare not admit it in public.

    Trash Sheehan.

  52. 52.

    Hoodlumman

    August 30, 2005 at 4:41 pm

    It’s amazing how many times the same idiotic talking points can be recited in one thread. Has Saint Sheehan blamed Bush for the hurricane yet? It’d be a new talking point, at least.

  53. 53.

    Fred

    August 30, 2005 at 4:42 pm

    Uh, no. We’re “slamming” her for crapping on her son’s freely chosen sacrifice and for mouthing the ugly sentiments of the extreme left.

    Try and keep up, mmm-kay?

  54. 54.

    Fred

    August 30, 2005 at 4:44 pm

    The only poll that counts was taken last November after we pretty much ventilated and debated this topic ad nauseum.

    Geez, just deal, OK? And shower. Jeebus, the stench is coming over the internet from you smelly hippies. Damn.

  55. 55.

    Joe Albanese

    August 30, 2005 at 4:44 pm

    It’s not that Mrs. Sheehan doesn’t have the write to speak out, but that her opinions and statements should be received based on their merits, not on her status.

    well, that is exactly what is happening. There are approximately 1900 mothers of soldiers that died in Iraq. They are on all sides of the issue. Many pro-war moms have spoken out. Some have been trotted out by the adminstration and the media to ensure “balance”. And yet, even though she is just a mother like all the others, she is singled out for the Swift Boat smear attack machine. Why is that? One reason, she is resonating with what many Americans are starting to feel about this war.

    Facinating blog of a soldier that died in Iraq. Here is just a portion that makes me sick to my stomach, but you should read the whole thing:

    What the fuck has my chain of command been doing? We were winning somewhat when I left. And now we’re being pinned down in our own fucking homes? Insurgents are pushing locals out of their homes and taking over my area at will? What kind of fucktarded plan have we been half-assedly executing? Obviously the kind that neglects sound contact with locals. Obviously the kind that gives further distance to unbridged gaps between soldiers and locals. Obviously the kind that has shown enough weakness when confronted by the insugency that it has been encouraged to grow.

    Back home (the USA kind) I have no home, no job, and my commander in chief is on vacation (he’s about 20 days behind Ronald Reagan right now in the race to become the most vacationing president ever. Hey W! we all got our fingers crossed! Here’s to you and two more years of presidency…er vacationing!). Luckily pretty much everything that is important to me can fit into the back of a truck. Luckily I just paid off one of those.

    Stay the course?

  56. 56.

    Davebo

    August 30, 2005 at 4:45 pm

    “We’re “slamming” her for crapping on her son’s freely chosen sacrifice and for mouthing the ugly sentiments of the extreme left.”

    They’re doing it all for poor Casey….

  57. 57.

    jobiuspublius

    August 30, 2005 at 4:46 pm

    But, what you Sheehan critics are missing out on is that she didn’t lie us into war. She has no authority. Look, here is the important part:

    Dear Leader: blah blah blah noble cause yadda yadda yadda
    Cindy Sheehan: blah blah blah Which noble cause? yadda yadda yadda

    You see what a perfectly normal reaction it is to ask, “Which noble cause”? You know we are FUBAR when normal behavior is considered a protest.

  58. 58.

    Otto Man

    August 30, 2005 at 4:52 pm

    They’re doing it all for poor Casey….

    Well, obviously, they knew him better than his stupid mother.

    From what Michelle Malkin has said, I’m pretty sure she and Casey Sheehan were engaged to be married at the time of his death.

  59. 59.

    jaime

    August 30, 2005 at 4:52 pm

    “the stench is coming over the internet from you smelly hippies.”

    -Hippies? Are you effing kidding me? In what planet do hippies make up the anti-Iraq war movement?These “hippies” are the majority of the country now.

    “The only poll that counts was taken last November”

    -Ah…the vaunted political capital. It’s long dried up. You can thank Social Security, Terri Schiavo, high gas prices, and the debacle in the Islamic Republic of Iraq for that.

  60. 60.

    Joe Albanese

    August 30, 2005 at 4:55 pm

    That soldier that wrote in his blog better watch out because John Gibson would want him arrested. Can’t have free speech if you are against the war it seems:

    Guest hosting The Radio Factor, Fox News host John Gibson called for the arrest of an emailer “in the U.S. Army” who wrote Gibson a letter attacking the Bush administration’s Iraq war “lies” and told Gibson to “[g]et used to the protest.” The email, which Gibson said was sent to him “on a U.S. army.mil” email account, said that “Americans are finally waking up and seeing the lies and the fallacies of the Bush administration.” The emailer also wrote that “Fox News has done its best at bird-dogging the Iraq war.” “This guy is in the Army,” Gibson said after he finished reading the email. “Who knows? All right, find him and arrest him.

    Oh, wait a minute. The soldier that wrote the blog got killed in Iraq. Forgot.

  61. 61.

    John S.

    August 30, 2005 at 4:58 pm

    John is clearly obsessed with Mrs. Sheehan. He just can’t stop talking about her, even though he closed his first post about her with:

    I think this is the last time I am going to discuss this issue, because as careful as I have been to not say anything about Cindy personally, the jackasses on the far left are going to distort this post, lie, vilify, and attack anyway, and it just isn’t worth it to me to deal with their bullshit.

    Not only was this not the last time he spoke about her, but since then he has dropped the pretense of being careful not to say anything about her personally.

    Unfortunately for John, his own track record makes it pointless for anyone to distort, lie, villify or attack in any way his posts about Sheehan.

    He does a damn fine job of it himself.

  62. 62.

    Matt

    August 30, 2005 at 5:01 pm

    I do believe we’re shitting on her because she’s a lying publicity seeking fruitcake, who is milking (yes milking) her son’s death for all its worth. Its not about her son- its about her and her publicity and her book deals and her upcoming bus tour. If it was about her son, she would have made her statements and moved on. Unfortunately, once the idiot left (yes, idiot- most of you moonbats wouldn’t know a clue if it landed on top of you) figured out Sheehan could be a symbol, they’ve used her to get their (your?) ridiculous message out.

    Anyone have handy that list floating around of all the crap Sheehan’s been spewing ? For instance, apparently, we’re carrying out a nuclear war in Iraq- if you moonbats would be kind enough to point me to any documentation confirming that we have used nuclear weapons in Iraq, I’ll register democrat tomorrow.

  63. 63.

    Matt

    August 30, 2005 at 5:03 pm

    *John is clearly obsessed with Mrs. Sheehan. He just can’t stop talking about her, even though he closed his first post about her with:*

    The sheer amount of clueless moonbattery in the comment section suggests that some of you idiot liberals are obsessed with John.

  64. 64.

    Otto Man

    August 30, 2005 at 5:07 pm

    I do believe we’re shitting on her because she’s a lying publicity seeking fruitcake

    What has she lied about?

    For instance, apparently, we’re carrying out a nuclear war in Iraq- if you moonbats would be kind enough to point me to any documentation confirming that we have used nuclear weapons in Iraq, I’ll register democrat tomorrow.

    Got a citation for that claim? (Rush, Drudge and their kind don’t count.)

  65. 65.

    Mike

    August 30, 2005 at 5:08 pm

    “This little piece of crap president is ruining this country, and I take that very personally, you can count on it.”

    But that’s just your meaningless little opinion, not fact. You seem to have an awful hard time being able to tell the difference.

  66. 66.

    Joe Albanese

    August 30, 2005 at 5:11 pm

    Mike asked:

    if you moonbats would be kind enough to point me to any documentation confirming that we have used nuclear weapons in Iraq, I’ll register democrat tomorrow.

    Here you go. We welcome you to the Democratic party.

  67. 67.

    jaime

    August 30, 2005 at 5:13 pm

    “For instance, apparently, we’re carrying out a nuclear war in Iraq- if you moonbats would be kind enough to point me to any documentation confirming that we have used nuclear weapons in Iraq, I’ll register democrat tomorrow.”

    Depleted Uranium, moron.

    http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/95178_du12.shtml

  68. 68.

    summr

    August 30, 2005 at 5:15 pm

    How about saving another mother from grieving…this time over getting demoted for doing her job a little too well.
    See

    Army Contract Official Critical of Halliburton Pact Is Demoted

    Maybe I should try to get Sheehan to talk about this so that right wing
    bloggers will take notice ;-).

  69. 69.

    ppGaz

    August 30, 2005 at 5:15 pm

    Sheehan could be a symbol, they’ve used her

    Yes, the Bushes know nothing about symbols and using people.

    Like using 9-11 footage in GWB’s campaign last year, that wasn’t “using” at all, was it?

    You guys are so transparent and disgusting.

  70. 70.

    John S.

    August 30, 2005 at 5:17 pm

    The sheer amount of clueless moonbattery in the comment section suggests that some of you idiot liberals are obsessed with John.

    You take your cues well from the GOP.

    It isn’t about the war in Iraq, it’s about Cindy Sheehan.

    It isn’t about John’s obsession with Sheehan, it’s about our obsession with John.

    Don’t choke on that pretzel logic, Matt.

  71. 71.

    Joe Albanese

    August 30, 2005 at 5:17 pm

    Mike need anymore “documentation”? here is 155,000 search results in google. Enjoy.

  72. 72.

    rayabacus

    August 30, 2005 at 5:18 pm

    John,
    Sorry I stopped by. Well….not really – I guess I’m just sorry that I fell in this cesspool you call “comments”. Now I’ll have to go shower. You apparantly have a rule that there can be no discourse in your comments. I find that very rare.

    No matter which side you are on, the only result of posting here is to be labled somehow and personally attacked, by one side or the other. Jeez! I would have thought that you would prefer thoughtful, reasonable, logical give and take. You know…pursuasive oratory…somekind of discussion or debate where REASON is the final arbiter. Of course, you know, that decent people can have real disagreements about certain subjects; yet agree to disagree, shake hands and have a beer….or a coffee. Apparntly that is not POSSIBLE here. For the most part (there are a few exceptions) all I see is unreasonable people with diminished intellects trying to compensate by shouting their side’s mantra hysterically.

    I think you have welcomed the arsonists – handed them the accelerant – and they are now burning your site from the bottom up. Sort of reminiscent of ………Hell.

  73. 73.

    Boronx

    August 30, 2005 at 5:19 pm

    I do believe we’re shitting on her because she’s a lying…

    Excuse me while I chuckle at the thought of a pro-war advocate who cares if they’ve been lied to. Go on, tell another one!

  74. 74.

    ppGaz

    August 30, 2005 at 5:20 pm

    But that’s just your meaningless little opinion

    My opinion is equal in both size and meaning to yours.

    And my opinion on this war is now the mainstream opinion in this country.

    Sling your dismissive smack all you like, this party is over. I’m betting we don’t see any more carrier footage of this lowlife president in a flight suit for a while, followed by boasting or “bring it on” chestbeating. You?

  75. 75.

    pmm

    August 30, 2005 at 5:24 pm

    Ppgaz wrote;

    This thread is about whether we are going to sit here and invite people to take dumps on Cindy Sheehan for speaking out for what is now the mainstream position of views on this war in this country.

    Mrs. Sheehan gets attacked because her ‘mainstream’ views are part and parcel of her fringe views. In previous threads, both you and I have taken care to disassociate ourselves with those on our respective sides who pretty much go nuts.

    Mrs. Sheehan got her notoriety/popularity not simply because she was making anti-war arguments, but because she “spoke truth to power” with her innovative protest style and her status as a grieving mother meant that her statements were initially above reproach–how dare folks actually refute her claims! She lost a son in the war! We’re not “trashing” (not your term) her for being a mother, or being anti-war, but because her foreign policy prescriptions are puerile (withdraw now!), conspiratorial (zionists and oil barons killed my son!), and openly supportive of an enemy that actually killed her son–and a great many others (freedom fighters!).

  76. 76.

    pmm

    August 30, 2005 at 5:25 pm

    So depleted uranium shells are nuclear weapons! I bet Arlington must be filled with tankers from the 1980’s and 1990’s who handled them…

  77. 77.

    Joe Albanese

    August 30, 2005 at 5:30 pm

    pmm… the claim was made by Mike that Cindy Sheehan said that the US was carrying out a nuclear war in Iraq. I tend to doubt that is what she said. I am sure she was talking about the depleted uranium shells that we linked to. So, please show us the “documentation” where Cindy said the US was waging a NUCLEAR WAR.

    Mike called her a liar. Now you or Mike can back that up with some evidence.

  78. 78.

    pmm

    August 30, 2005 at 5:30 pm

    Upon reflection, I believe that my previous statement was an insufficient rebuttal to the charges above. Please find a FAQ on DU here. I should note on review of it that DU isn’t as harmless as ball ammo, it’s hardly anything comparable to nuclear weapons–unless you want to argue that the mild radiation that enables army-issued compasses to glow is “nuclear”.

  79. 79.

    pmm

    August 30, 2005 at 5:35 pm

    Joe Albanese, I don’t know about that ‘nuclear war’ statement, but I’ll maintain that bad-mouthing depleted uranium shells is an old, and as yet unproven method of guilt-by-association. Simply using uranium in our armaments isn’t wrong. I should note that our use of DU shells greatly predates the Iraq war and doesn’t really speak to that issue at hand, so if Mrs. Sheehan did bring that up on her own, I’d say it’s a pretty bad argument regarding OIF.

    However, I suspect that we shall soon be engaged in dueling studies, my DoD/arms contractor funded studies versus your anti-war/environmental group-funded studies.

  80. 80.

    ppGaz

    August 30, 2005 at 5:36 pm

    We’re not “trashing” (not your term) her for being a mother, or being anti-war, but because her foreign policy prescriptions are puerile

    Let me see if I heard you correctly:

    Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Look! Sheehan’s a ditzy liberal!! blah blah blah blah blah blah.

    Like I said, Sheehan is not the issue. The country did not go to war over Sheehan. It is not going to pull out of a war over Sheehan. None of this is about Sheehan.

    Your lying piece of dirt president can’t lead his own country, can’t bring together his own party the last time I looked. You have more important things to worry about than Sheehan. But by all means, keep talking about Sheehan.

  81. 81.

    Joe Albanese

    August 30, 2005 at 5:40 pm

    your right pmm… we can both show studies to support our view of depleted uranium shells so I’m not going to get into a debate about it as the issue is unresolved. But that doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be brought up by Cindy Sheehan does it? We now KNOW how damaging Agent Orange was in Viet Nam right, but I am sure there were stuidies at the time saying how harless it was. Why is the right so willing to belive and give deference to power? That is the thing that amazes me about your side.

  82. 82.

    jobiuspublius

    August 30, 2005 at 5:41 pm

    About 2 weaks ago I went to a vigil. A woman announced that her nephew is in Iraq. She says her nephew told her that he and everyone stationed there has to sign an agreement that they will not have children for 2 years after they arrive fro Iraq. I wonder why.

    I also heard that the stop losses are implemented by extending service for 25 years or more. Not sure what the real deal is. After all, why the agreement if your going to be there till 2035 or bust?

    Either way, it’s messed up. Much more messed up than Sheehan. But, Sheehan can’t fight back like Dear Leader can.

  83. 83.

    Techie

    August 30, 2005 at 5:58 pm

    Good Lord,

    And they wonder why they continue to lose elections.

    I’m sure “America is not worthy fighting for” will play well in ’06. I propose the DNC use it in several commericals.

  84. 84.

    John S.

    August 30, 2005 at 7:39 pm

    Techie-

    People are now wondering how folks like you keep winning elections.

    Cheap slogans and the continual use of the “patriot” card will play well in ’06, if the goal is to nauseate the voters. I propose the RNC keeps up the good work.

  85. 85.

    Mike

    August 30, 2005 at 7:55 pm

    Joe Albanese Says:
    ” Many pro-war moms have spoken out. Some have been trotted out by the adminstration and the media to ensure “balance”.”

    So all the Left-Wing mothers are sincere when they speak against the war but some of the right-wing mothers are ‘trotted out” by the evil administration and the media. You can’t be stupid enough to believe this…can you?

  86. 86.

    Mike

    August 30, 2005 at 8:00 pm

    “Matt Says:
    John is clearly obsessed with Mrs. Sheehan. He just can’t stop talking about her, even though he closed his first post about her with:

    The sheer amount of clueless moonbattery in the comment section suggests that some of you idiot liberals are obsessed with John.”

    What I don’t get is they complain about him, whine when he says something they disagree with, accuse him of “obsessing”, then they won’t fucking leave. What? Is Kos full these days? No more Moonbats allowed in? Just who is obsessing here? I think some of them are “obsessing” over John.

  87. 87.

    Mike

    August 30, 2005 at 8:01 pm

    “Joe Albanese Says:
    Mike asked:

    if you moonbats would be kind enough to point me to any documentation confirming that we have used nuclear weapons in Iraq, I’ll register democrat tomorrow.
    Here you go. We welcome you to the Democratic party.”

    Are you guys talking about something I said? I can’t recall ever mentioning nuclear weapons.

  88. 88.

    Stormy70

    August 30, 2005 at 8:01 pm

    Mother Sheehan appearing with Al Sharpton: “It’s the JOOS!”

    She made a fool of herself on NPR of all places today.

  89. 89.

    Matt Holmes

    August 30, 2005 at 8:06 pm

    rayabacus, you’ve hit on exactly why I don’t bother posting here. It’s fuego-tastic here and little more.

  90. 90.

    ppGaz

    August 30, 2005 at 8:10 pm

    She made a fool of herself

    So what? You make a fool of yourself here every day.

  91. 91.

    Joe Albanese

    August 30, 2005 at 8:44 pm

    Mike said:

    Are you guys talking about something I said? I can’t recall ever mentioning nuclear weapons.

    sorry Mike, it was Matt’s comment.

  92. 92.

    John S.

    August 30, 2005 at 8:48 pm

    Mother Sheehan appearing with Al Sharpton: “It’s the JOOS!”

    Sorry Stormy, but I doubt you and G. Gordon Liddy’s ‘concern’ for we JEWS being impugned has anything to do with your love for us.

    Rather, you are concerned aboutt using us as a nice buffer between yourself and those ‘crazy Arabs’ in the form of that shield known as Israel.

    I don’t know who you think you’re bullshitting, but this Hebrew isn’t buying it.

  93. 93.

    pmm

    August 30, 2005 at 10:01 pm

    Your lying piece of dirt president can’t lead his own country, can’t bring together his own party the last time I looked. You have more important things to worry about than Sheehan. But by all means, keep talking about Sheehan.

    Ppgaz, if you want to just revel in your hatred of the President and his policies, more power to you. However, given that you’ve saluted Mrs. Sheehan for her brave truth-telling, and you’ve refrained from actually defending her stances, I take it that any criticism of the President shouldn’t be judged on its merits.

    You can’t have it both ways: either Mrs. Sheehan is a voice of the ‘mainstream’ anti-war movement speaking for the people or she’s not. If she is, defend her criticisms and policy prescriptions. If she’s not, then please explain why she’s wrong and despite her following and service as a rallying point for the anti-war movement, she does not represent you.

    I’d love to defend the president of the allegations you’ve made yourself, but given that you think that his being a former alcoholic is a term of opprobrium, I don’t know where to start at this point. He should still be drinking? Or maybe I should prove with charts and graphs that he isn’t technically a ‘piece of dirt’ or a ‘ne’er do well’.

  94. 94.

    goonie bird

    August 30, 2005 at 10:09 pm

    Instead of flapping her big mouth why dont her and her band of nit-wits go to NEW ORLEANS and help out instead of calling the usial rediclous news confrence and shooting off her big mouth?

  95. 95.

    ppGaz

    August 30, 2005 at 10:09 pm

    Mrs. Sheehan is a voice of the ‘mainstream’

    Ms. Sheehan is a voice for herself.

    The mainstream is a voice for itself.

    The fact that she and the mainstream have some views in common, interesting.

    All that crap you wrote? I have no idea what it meant, or what you think it adds. You might as well have been playing Lady of Spain by slapping your fanny.

    The issue worth talking about is George Bush, the cowardly little pipsqueak of a man in the White House, and his phony, stupid war, which is becoming more and more despised by the American people.

    You can fart your way to heaven talking about Sheehan from now till hell freezes over, just like John Cole, and just laauuggghh and have a great time. But like I said, Sheehan is not the issue. The war is the issue.

  96. 96.

    pmm

    August 30, 2005 at 10:15 pm

    Joe Albanese, your point on the undecided nature of depleted uranium is well taken, but with regards to the discussion at hand it doesn’t have any relevance regarding OIF. It comes across as one of many generic criticisms of the military–we used depleted uranium shells in Desert Storm, we had depleted uranium shells on our Abrahms in Bosnia and Kosovo, and presumably they’ve been present at any conflict in the recent past where we’ve put the M1 on the ground.

    To me, the depleted uranium issue is just badmouthing the military in general, and doesn’t say anything about whether we should be in Iraq or not. It’s throwing stuff at the wall and seeing what will stick, and does suggest that the argument was made in good faith.

  97. 97.

    John S.

    August 30, 2005 at 10:26 pm

    Instead of flapping her big mouth why dont her and her band of nit-wits go to NEW ORLEANS and help out instead of calling the usial rediclous news confrence and shooting off her big mouth?

    Instead of flapping his big mouth why dont the President and his band of nit-wits go to NEW ORLEANS and help out instead of calling the usial rediclous news confrence and shooting off his big mouth?

    As usual, all Sheehan, all the time.

  98. 98.

    Mike

    August 30, 2005 at 11:05 pm

    “John S. Says:
    Mother Sheehan appearing with Al Sharpton: “It’s the JOOS!”
    Sorry Stormy, but I doubt you and G. Gordon Liddy’s ‘concern’ for we JEWS being impugned has anything to do with your love for us.

    Rather, you are concerned aboutt using us as a nice buffer between yourself and those ‘crazy Arabs’ in the form of that shield known as Israel.

    I don’t know who you think you’re bullshitting, but this Hebrew isn’t buying it.”

    Hmmm, I hardly think that’s true of most Americans, and you have little to go on to accuse someone here of it. But your comment does make me wonder, do you consider yourself an Israeli or an American? Why else would you use the phrase: “using us as a nice buffer between yourself and those ‘crazy Arabs’ in the form of that shield known as Israel.” When the Israelis were found to have stolen classified information awhile back from America, did you cheer them? Were you glad they “poked the eye of America” so to speak?

  99. 99.

    John S.

    August 30, 2005 at 11:18 pm

    Mike-

    I’m an American Jew. That is a far cry from being Israeli. I don’t know where you get your ludicrous notions from regarding what you think is some smoking gun in my stating the obvious reason why America is so doggedly pro-Israel.

    How you equate the two is beyond me. I think you had better get out your tinfoil hat and your copy of Conspiracy magazine.

  100. 100.

    Stormy70

    August 31, 2005 at 12:05 am

    John, you certainly presume alot for someone who just got here. I don’t really know who G. Gordon Liddy is, or why you think I consider Israel a buffer. WTF?! It’s not my fault the light of your lefty life is an anti-semitic far-left full-on Moonbat that even embarrasses NPR liberals. She has neo-nazis cheering her on, and she supports Lynn Stewart. I don’t like the company she keeps. She has become farce.

  101. 101.

    Jim Caputo

    August 31, 2005 at 12:06 am

    John, I’m getting to this thread a little late in the game, but I’m wondering what you found so “repellent and repugnant” about the quote you posted.

    While George golfed yesterday, the worst hurricane ever struck New Orleans;

    She’s not saying the hurricane is his fault; she’s criticizing him for being on vacation while the country is at war. We can argue about whether that’s the right thing to do, but it’s not repellent nor repugnant. It’s a legitiment complaint.

    oil went up to over 68.00/barrel;

    While the fact itself is repellent and repugnant, it’s not a situation of her doing, and she’s not the one who criticized Clinton during a debate with Gore for not getting on the phone with the Saudis and making them lower crude prices.

    and an American soldier was killed in the charade and cataclysmic occupation of Iraq. The soldier’s family doesn’t even know what’s going to hit them yet. The death is “Pending Notification.”

    Is it repellent and repugnant to point out that we have kids dying over there? Or does the new patriotism take the form of numbing America so we don’t mind all the deaths. I thought we were trying to establish a culture of life here?

    I continually ask myself: “How do George Bush and other death-mongers live with themselves?”

    I wonder about that too. Personally, I think the percentage of sociopaths in the White House is higher than it’s ever been. Does that make me repellent and repugnant too? Does the mere questioning of Bush’s mental condition make one an enemy of the state? Does it cause angry Middle Easters to pick up guns?

    While George vacations and bikes and golfs his way to the lowest poll numbers since Richard Nixon, other “patriots” are wrapping themselves in the Stars and Stripes and going along with the farce that the mission from hell:

    Too many people are in agreement with her assessment of the Iraq situation to discount this as mere repellent and repugnant ramblings. And I don’t see any way for Bush & Co. to rebound from this. There’s just too much momentum against him now. That said, I think they’ll make an attempt. Perhaps in the form of some kind of attack on Iran. But at this point, I think the public will see the move as cynical and politically contrived, rather than as necessary to our national security.

    Killing more people in Iraq, because so many have already been killed” is somehow a good thing ordained by God.

    I think she’s correct, albeit not very eloquent. Bush’s mantra about how we have to stay in Iraq or the dead troops will have died for nothing really amounts to this: we have to get more troops killed because we’ve gotten troops killed already. It’s a circular argument and people are finally picking up on it.

    I can live with myself, but trust me, sleep does not come easily to me these days.

    This woman is doing what her heart has told her to do from the beginning. If the fact that the message is successfully reaching the public makes her political in your eyes, fine. But I don’t think she has ever been motivated more by politics than by her grief.

    Okay John, that’s the entirety of what you quoted from her. Which part is the repellent and repugnant part?

  102. 102.

    John S.

    August 31, 2005 at 12:26 am

    She has become farce.

    Who better to know a thing or two about farce than you, Stormy?

  103. 103.

    mike NOT Mike

    August 31, 2005 at 1:11 am

    I’m just stopping in to say… ppgaz, you rock!

  104. 104.

    Joe Albanese

    August 31, 2005 at 9:41 am

    pmm :

    To me, the depleted uranium issue is just badmouthing the military in general,

    ppm stop trying to make everything the left says as an attack on the military. Decisions like this are not made by the grunts in the field. Decisions like this are made by the civilian leadership in the Pentagon. I know you love to frame us all as being against the military but the concern about depleted uranium being used is because of the possible deleterious effects on the soldiers fighting. Its a statement to SUPPORT the troops. To PROTECT the troops. Remember AGENT ORANGE? So if someone at the time came out and said, “hey wait a minute this agent organge shit might not be so good for our guys” that would mean they were AGAINST the military? Please enough with this transparent ploy, it ain’t working anymore my friend.

  105. 105.

    Mike

    August 31, 2005 at 9:55 am

    “John S. Says:
    Mike-

    I’m an American Jew. That is a far cry from being Israeli. I don’t know where you get your ludicrous notions from regarding what you think is some smoking gun in my stating the obvious reason why America is so doggedly pro-Israel.

    How you equate the two is beyond me. I think you had better get out your tinfoil hat and your copy of Conspiracy magazine.”

    Okay, let’s break it down:

    You said: “Rather, you are concerned aboutt using us as a nice buffer between yourself and those ‘crazy Arabs’ in the form of that shield known as Israel.

    The “us” in your above statement infers that you see yourself as an Israeli being used as a buffer between America and “those crazy Arabs”. Which caused me to question where your loyalties lie. It was just an interesting way of looking at things you’ve got there. No hat needed, those were your words, not mine. I was just wondering whether you’d gone over to Israel to defend her against the maniacs trying to wipe her off the face of the Earth. Can’t tell on the Internet where someone is located, at least not without actually caring enough to find out.

  106. 106.

    pmm

    August 31, 2005 at 10:28 am

    Joe Albanese, perhaps I can rephrase, because I think you’ve misunderstood me. For the sake of argument, let’s assume that DU is every bit as harmful as its critics allege. Because the use of DU is commonplace throughout the army, it’s use in Iraq isn’t a strike against our Iraq policy, it’s a strike against a general military practice.

    It’s akin to saying that the administration’s veteran’s benefits policies demonstrate that our current policies in Iraq are wrong. They may be right or wrong, but they don’t actually have anything to do with Iraq.

    At best, citing the use of DU in opposition to the war is muddying the message, by conflating general concerns about DoD policies with concerns about DoD policies in Iraq. At worst, it’s part of a campaign to “prove” the callous disregard of DoD and the civilian leadership for the troops. That’s not actually addressing the policies that critics claim need to be changed–that’s an attempt to demonize the opposition. It’s somewhat equivalent to accusing war critics of being treasonous because they lower morale with any criticism.

  107. 107.

    John S.

    August 31, 2005 at 11:48 am

    Mike-

    We’re ALL Jews, regardless of where our nationality is. And quite frankly, my primary loyalty is to G-d, not some man-made government.

    Hope that clears things up for you.

  108. 108.

    goonie bird

    August 31, 2005 at 11:30 pm

    Why dont hanoi jane take her bus to NEW ORLEANS maybe they will loot it and burn it afterwards

Comments are closed.

Trackbacks

  1. Balloon Juice says:
    August 30, 2005 at 4:55 pm

    […] I have had a few pieces of hate mail, and I have weathered some pretty stupid commentary, but this is hands down the best comment I have ever received (for sheer entertainment value): […]

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • Alison Rose on Postcard Writing Party & Music Thread (Sep 23, 2023 @ 8:51pm)
  • Mousebumples on Postcard Writing Party & Music Thread (Sep 23, 2023 @ 8:51pm)
  • dkinPa on Postcard Writing Party & Music Thread (Sep 23, 2023 @ 8:49pm)
  • WaterGirl on Postcard Writing Party & Music Thread (Sep 23, 2023 @ 8:48pm)
  • Another Scott on Postcard Writing Party & Music Thread (Sep 23, 2023 @ 8:46pm)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
What Has Biden Done for You Lately?

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Cole & Friends Learn Español

Introductory Post
Cole & Friends Learn Español

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!