So now it is Cindy, not Bush who put the troops in danger.
Posted By: Democrat on 2005-08-30
In Reply to: Cindy isn't interested in helping the victims down there. She's just mad they are stealing - nt
Not the terrorist, it's Cindy. I get it now, thanks for sharing that with us.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
They were in danger before Cindy even thought
about going to Crawford. Can this be evidenced by increasing US losses? If there are more losses, it probably has more to do with the constitution that the sunni's are rejecting, not Cindy Shehan. The marine who wrote the letter to Ohio that's posted on the con board is entitled to his opinion, but I think the responsibility is misplaced. I pray for his safe return home.
Bush Says U.S. Troops Will Stay in Iraq Past ང
GOP Unrest Dismissed As Sign of Election Year
Well it didn't take a rocket scientist to know that this mess was not going to get cleaned up on his watch.
This statement alone lets you know Bush is out of touch and in his own bubble. * There's a certain unease as you head into an election year, he said.* Of course GOP unrest has a lot to do with the election year because they know they will have to answer to the people on election day, not Bush.
See link.
Pres. Bush holds completely stated "teleconference" with troops
Gads, I think he's a slow learner. This sort of stuff doesn't go over well, IMHO. Might make people think he is a big phony.
AP - 42 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - It was billed as a conversation with U.S. troops, but the questions President Bush asked on a teleconference call Thursday were choreographed to match his goals for the war in Iraq and Saturday's vote on a new Iraqi constitution. This is an important time, Allison Barber, deputy assistant defense secretary, said, coaching the soldiers before Bush arrived. The president is looking forward to having just a conversation with you..
Does anyone else see a clear and present danger?
L
I think brains like yours are the greatest danger
Muddle-headed citizens like you are precisely what the terrorists count on most.
Then you haven't been paying attention to Able Danger. sm
It's a huge story, being ignored by the MSM right now, but investigation is underway.
You tred on danger uniformed ground. NI
123
No danger there. No lying crooks are running.
nm
No danger of no shows. Media coverage alone
imagine that. W being upstaged by an elite, Islamic, racist, terrorist, socialist, commie pinko Nazi.
One question, does Able Danger prove that Bill Clinton is responsible for 9-11?
I don't think so. That is what the poster on this thread is suggesting.
Right on Cindy
Sheehan
This is George Bush’s accountability moment. That’s why I’m here. The mainstream media aren’t holding him accountable. Neither is Congress. So I’m not leaving Crawford until he’s held accountable. It’s ironic, given the attacks leveled at me recently, how some in the media are so quick to scrutinize -- and distort -- the words and actions of a grieving mother but not the words and actions of the president of the United States.
But now it’s time for him to level with me and with the American people. I think that’s why there’s been such an outpouring of support. This is giving the 61 percent of Americans who feel that the war is wrong something to do -- something that allows their voices to be heard. It’s a way for them to stand up and show that they DO want our troops home, and that they know this war IS a mistake… a mistake they want to see corrected. It’s too late to bring back the people who are already dead, but there are tens of thousands of people still in harm’s way.
There is too much at stake to worry about our own egos. When my son was killed, I had to face the fact that I was somehow also responsible for what happened. Every American that allows this to continue has, to some extent, blood on their hands. Some of us have a little bit, and some of us are soaked in it.
People have asked what it is I want to say to President Bush. Well, my message is a simple one. He’s said that my son -- and the other children we’ve lost -- died for a noble cause. I want to find out what that noble cause is. And I want to ask him: “If it’s such a noble cause, have you asked your daughters to enlist? Have you encouraged them to go take the place of soldiers who are on their third tour of duty?” I also want him to stop using my son’s name to justify the war. The idea that we have to “complete the mission” in Iraq to honor Casey’s sacrifice is, to me, a sacrilege to my son’s name. Besides, does the president any longer even know what “the mission” really is over there?
Casey knew that the war was wrong from the beginning. But he felt it was his duty to go, that his buddies were going, and that he had no choice. The people who send our young, honorable, brave soldiers to die in this war, have no skin in the game. They don’t have any loved ones in harm’s way. As for people like O’Reilly and Hannity and Michelle Malkin and Rush Limbaugh and all the others who are attacking me and parroting the administration line that we must complete the mission there -- they don’t have one thing at stake. They don’t suffer through sleepless nights worrying about their loved ones
Before this all started, I used to think that one person couldn’t make a difference... but now I see that one person who has the backing and support of millions of people can make a huge difference.
That’s why I’m going to be out here until one of three things happens: It’s August 31st and the president’s vacation ends and he leaves Crawford. They take me away in a squad car. Or he finally agrees to speak with me.
If he does, he’d better be prepared for me to hold his feet to the fire. If he starts talking about freedom and democracy -- or about how the war in Iraq is protecting America -- I’m not going to let him get away with it.
Like I said, this is George Bush’s accountability moment.
Cindy S/Pat B.
While Cindy S. may be authentic about being a grieving mother. Her past actions compared with her actions recently don't prove her to be authentic. The point was her son volunteered to go into the armed forces. Maybe she was behind him going into the military, because she thought his going into the military meant he'd get to travel and get tuition for college, and it never crossed her mind that he would have to go to war (unrealistic way to think about serving in the armed forces in the first place) but if she had these convictions when Casey signed up then she should have been pleading for him not to enlist.
Okay, let's look at that scenario. Let's say she did plead with him him not to, because her convictions about war were exactly as they are today. That would only prove that Casey did not hold the same convictions that she did. So, in that case she is not being "authentic" in channeling what her dead son would think of her protest. She needs to go home and take care of her younger son who is pleading for her to come home, and try to heal an obviously broken marriage, but that would put a cramp in getting her face on camera.
As far as I'm concerned Pat Buchanan has nothing to do with this whole scenario. He's just another politician with another opinion, and those are about a dime a dozen.
Cindy
Cindy Sheehan
Did you see where Cindy Sheehan, who lost her son in 2004 in Iraq, is camping out in front of Bush's ranch and she has gotten interviews with CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN. She states she wants to talk to Bush but he send two of his aides outside to tell her he won't meet with her. Why not, I wonder. He is our president, we elected him to office, he is our servant. I think he owes her a meeting. She gave the ultimate sacrifice, her son. He can't sacrifice a half hour to one hour of his FIVE WEEK vacation? Vacation, what is that? Do you think Clinton or Bush, Sr or even Reagan would have met with her. I think each of them would have.
Can you say Cindy Sheehan?
It just doesn't add up. Pat didn't have to go, so why would he have gone for a illegal war? I think Mrs. Tilman is another grieving mother expressing her grief in a not-so-honoring way to her son. I've not walked that road of grief, so I'll save my judgements of Mrs. Tilman beyond that...
Cindy Sheehan
Nominate her for pest of the year. She's making a mockery out of what her son believed in. She's a sorry excuse for a mother.
More on Cindy Sheehan...
Again...as with most protestors...it is not about the cause, it is about the protestor. This woman should be ashamed of herself.
Back then (forever ago, it seems), you could turn on any of the major networks – CBS (Cindy Broadcasting System), NBC (National Broadcast of Cindy), ABC (All ‘Bout Cindy), or even 24-hour coverage on CNN (Cindy News Network) – to hear her sad tale of woe about how she was fighting a one-woman battle against the imperial presidency in honor of her fallen son – deliberately killed by the neo-conservative cabal of Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld and Halliburton while he was serving in Iraq – by courageously confronting the forces of evil by camping out on the front lawn of the President Bush’s Crawford, Texas ranch.
What heroism. What bravery.
One prop used by Cindy Sheehan at “Camp Casey” (named in honor of her fallen son, Casey Sheehan) was a fake cemetery filled with 2,000 crosses representing all of those American military service members killed in the line of duty up to that time in the Global War on Terrorism. One of those crosses bore the name of Casey Sheehan, who was killed in action on April 4, 2004. There’s even video of her tending to his fake grave surrounded by representatives of the mainstream media. (It should be noted that at least one Gold Star family didn’t appreciate their son’s death being part of Sheehan’s “Camp Casey” media circus. Gary Qualls of Temple, Texas drove to the location and removed the prop wooden cross bearing his son’s name from Sheehan’s faux cemetery, saying, “I don’t believe in some of the things happening here. I find it disrespectful.”)
But at Casey Sheehan’s real grave in Vacaville-Elmira Cemetery in Vacaville, California, the Peace Mom couldn’t bother with having a headstone or even a wooden cross to mark his passing. Until recently, that is, when critics began to take notice of Casey Sheehan’s lonely unmarked grave.
Heaven knows she should have been aware of this grave oversight. In the January 2006 issue of Vanity Fair, Cindy Sheehan was featured in a macabre two-page pictoral spread of her posing on Casey’s grave. In a pathetic twist of irony, she was being honored by the magazine for the “Best Stand of 2005”.
From the Vanity Fair spread, it seems that her son’s real grave was as much of a prop as his fake grave. It wasn’t until Cindy Sheehan began receiving severe criticisms about the absence of any marker at Casey’s grave that the “Peace Mom” began to respond.
The first indication that she was starting to feel the heat from critics noting her traveling cemetary while her son’s grave went unmarked was seen in a blog entry she posted dated April 11th at Truthout.org (the left-wing website that on May 13th announced that Karl Rove was about to be indicted not long before the special prosecutor announced that he wasn’t subject to prosecution), where she offers a rambling explanation for why her son – dead for more than two years – had no tombstone. Of course, it is four paragraphs before she gets around to answering the question about the absence of a tombstone at Casey’s grave:
We had a Casualty Officer who abandoned us when our mortuary refused to pay the cemetery and told us that the government sent the money to the mortuary, so now it is your problem. You may have to sue the mortuary. Our government discards and dishonors its own.
So you see, it was George Bush, Dick Cheney and Karl Rove who were to blame for Casey Sheehan’s unadorned grave. But she later gives a more reasonable explanation – her mental instability:
For the first year after Casey was killed, I didn't want to believe it. I didn't want to place a TOMBstone on my son's grave. I didn't want one more marble proof that my son was dead. I couldn't even call where he was buried a cemetery, I had to call it Casey's Park. I placed fresh flowers in the cup every week and journaled there almost on a daily basis, and often laid on it and fell asleep and dreamed of my needlessly killed son. Have any of these people who claim that I am pissing on my son's grave even visited him?
In attacking her critics, she misses the very point she raises herself – if any of us had wanted to visit her son’s grave, how would we be able to find it without some kind of marker?
A quick examination of her explanation for this grave oversight raises glaring contradictions with known facts. Her first excuse is to blame the government. Let’s weigh her story with what we know to be true.
Had the Sheehan family chosen to have Casey buried in a National Cemetery (and his combat-related death would have made him eligible for a spot in Arlington National Cemetery), virtually all expenses would have been covered by the military. They didn’t choose that option. Instead, they had him buried in a private cemetery in his hometown – a perfectly legitimate option. In that instance (a private internment), the Department of Defense reimburses actual burial expenses up to $7,700. In addition to that, the actual expense of transporting his remains back to California would also be reimbursed by the government.
However, it wasn’t just the government in on this conspiracy, according to Sheehan; it was also the mortuary's fault for failing to pay the cemetery. It was only a few days after Sheehan publicly accused that owner of the mortuary that handled Casey funeral that he came forward to correct her story, as recorded in the Vacaville Reporter:
Steve Nadeau, the mortuary's owner, said Monday that not only did he properly pay the cemetery, but that he subsidized the process with his own money…
In an e-mail sent to The Reporter Sunday, Nadeau expressed hurt and disbelief at Sheehan's comments. He said that the amount of money the military gave the mortuary for Casey's funeral service and cemetery arrangements didn't even come close to covering the costs.
Several kind citizens made donations, said Nadeau. I absorbed the rest.
This was not the only way in which he went above and beyond his responsibilities following Casey's death, said Nadeau. He also provided a stretch limousine and a driver at his expense, he said, and invited the family to go to the airport with him so that he could accompany them. None of this was required, said Nadeau.
Having known the Sheehan family for many years through St. Mary's Catholic Church where Ms. Sheehan had previously been the youth director, it was my desire to provide care and dignity to Casey and the family. I did this in every respect.
Nadeau also refuted Sheehan's statement that the mortuary finally paid the cemetery only after the family threatened to bring the story to the media.
This never happened, said Nadeau. I would stop by the family home as I do most families' homes and check with them on necessary needs, etc.
Nadeau said the military provided his mortuary $5,736 in funding to pay for the funeral service and cemetery arrangements. The funding came in May 2004, said Nadeau, and he paid the cemetery as soon as the costs had been totaled and the donations received.
Now this testimony is very damning for Cindy Sheehan. According to the funeral director, the government came through with funding within a month of Casey’s death, and the cemetery was paid immediately. Anyone who has ever had to deal with getting money from the federal government knows this is lightning speed.
Admittedly, the funeral director’s story is not above questioning. Since Casey’s remains would have been embalmed, dressed and laid out at the Charles C. Carson Center for Mortuary Affairs at Dover Air Force Base even before they were sent to California, and the Defense Department would have covered transportation costs for his remains to be returned to his family, one wonders exactly what the $5,736 was actually paying for? Then again, the “death care” industry is known for its extraordinary product and service markups.
But what about Casey’s tombstone? This is where Cindy Sheehan’s excuses start to fall apart entirely.
In fact, the Department of Veterans Affairs provides virtually all veterans free headstones and grave markers at no cost to the family. From personal experience, I know that it only takes 2-3 months once the VA Form 40-1330 is submitted for these to be delivered directly to the cemetery. In most cases, private cemeteries will lay a base and install the veteran’s headstone or marker at no charge.
Perhaps “Peace Mom” was too busy with her anti-war activism to bother filling out the one page form?
Finally in May, Casey Sheehan’s grave finally received its headstone. In another article by the Vacaville Reporter (May 27th), Cindy Sheehan was quoted as saying that she had to pay for it out of her own pocket.
Sheehan said she had paid for the tombstone herself and was part of a family effort to put it up, even though its installation saddened her.
It is important for the rest of Casey's family to have one, she wrote Friday. I guess the pain of seeing it etched in marble that he is dead is another pain I will have to deal with.
…The headstone was very expensive, Sheehan wrote. She said that the government should have paid for it because of its responsibility for his death. But Sheehan said money is not the main issue.
Surely we should feel some pity for poor Cindy Sheehan for having to fork out the money for her son’s tombstone, even though he died in combat in service to his country? Well, again, this is where Sheehan’s story doesn’t fit the facts.
What she apparently forgot to tell the world in her bitter defense of her son’s unmarked grave was that the funeral reimbursement from the Defense Department wasn’t the only money she received from the government for Casey’s death. At least one former military official noted last month before Casey’s tombstone was installed that Sheehan was the beneficiary of a $250,000 Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (SGLI) policy. And legal documents filed in the divorce case of Patrick and Cindy Sheehan show that there was another Prudential Life Insurance policy (no. 43520001432577) paid at the time of his decease.
What has not been discussed (and Sheehan would be likely never to admit to) is that in addition to having actual funeral expenses reimbursed by the Defense Department and the SGLI and Prudential life insurance policies, Sheehan also received a $100,000 death gratuity from the government to cover miscellaneous expenses not covered by the DoD reimbursement. The $100,000 death gratuity is paid to all deaths in the line of duty retroactive to October 7, 2001, the beginning of post-9/11 military operations in Afghanistan.
While the description of Casey’s headstone described by the Vacaville Reporter sounds as if it is a fitting marker for a fallen hero killed in the defense of his country and that also reflects his personal interests, clearly the cost of it isn’t near the $100,000 Cindy Sheehan received from taxpayers to cover such expenses.
Now people might be led to think that the Feds get a big chunk of that money back in taxes. Cindy Sheehan even said last August at a Veterans for Peace rally that she was going to refuse to pay her 2004 taxes:
Another thing that I'm doing is - - my son was killed in 2004, so I'm not paying my taxes for 2004. If I get a letter from the IRS, I'm gonna say, you know what, this war is illegal; this is why this war is illegal. This war is immoral; this is why this war is immoral. You killed my son for this. I don't owe you anything. And if I live to be a million, I won't owe you a penny.
And I want them to come after me, because unlike what you've been doing with the war resistance, I want to put this frickin' war on trial. And I want to say, You give me my son, and I'll pay your taxes.
What she forgot to mention in her tirade is that the $350,000 paid to her by the government ($250,000 SGLI insurance policy and the $100,000 death gratuity) is entirely tax free.
But if Cindy Sheehan is correct that she had to pay for the monument out of her own pocket (even though she admitted to the Vacaville Reporter that her estranged husband, Patrick, handles all matters relating to Casey’s grave site, a fact confirmed by Steve Nadeau, the funeral director that handled Casey’s arrangements), the question has to be asked:
What happened to the hundreds of thousands of tax free dollars that Cindy Sheehan received from the U.S. Government for her son’s death?
One has only had to follow Sheehan’s anti-war activism over the past year to reasonably conclude that the money paid to Cindy Sheehan has been going to finance her globetrotting activist lifestyle. Yes, while Casey Sheehan’s grave went unmarked, his mother was spending the money given to her to pay for his funeral expenses having tea parties with Third-World tinpot dictators, like her BFF, Comrade Hugo Chavez.
From all accounts, Casey Sheehan was the kind of guy that you would enjoy knowing. His commitment to his country and the Global War on Terror that it is prosecuting was seen in the heroic actions that led to his death in Sadr City and in his voluntary reenlistment in 2004 knowing he would probably be sent back to Iraq. His death, like the deaths of all members of the military who die in service to their country, was tragic and a loss to all Americans.
But perhaps even more tragic is how Casey Sheehan’s mother has taken to politically trafficking in her son’s death advancing a cause that many close to him have said he would never have agreed with. His mother’s lack of concern about caring for and appropriately honoring her son’s remains while using her son’s unmarked grave as a photo prop for Vanity Fair and also erecting fake grave markers at her media events should tell us all we need to know about Cindy Sheehan.
With no thanks apparently due to her, Casey Sheehan’s grave has the marker he deserves.
Cindy McCain
sooo...because she did not use meth, crank, crack, etc - it's OKAY. (I guess when your'e filthy rich - IT IS)..wonder if you would feel that way if she were poor....it is as if you are DEFENDING her...sad...
He also lied to Cindy about his age.
He's 17 years older than her. A stupid thing to lie about. He lies just to lie. He lied when he said he would pick a VP who could step into the presidency. (Of all the women in the GOP, this was the best he could do?) He lies about drilling and how that will help the people with gas prices....laughable, but he keeps lying about that too.
That's funny because Cindy does that to me ...
We are opposite, though I do like Obama and McCain isn't too bad either, it's just his wife that gets me.
Obama's girls are beautiful. The youngest seems like she might be the "star" or handful of the family just by a few clips I've seen. :)
is cindy from alaska?
x
Cindy McCain
I was watching the RNC last night and they did a short video on Cindy McCain. She truly is a beautiful woman! They showed clips of some of the things that she has done for others and around the world. Truly an admirable and inspiring woman!! She is the type of woman I want as First Lady!
Cindy = Diana?
She's fragile - reportedly wearing about $300,000 of outfit in that golden dress (depending on whether or not the diamond earrings were real or fake. That's the cost of a decent home. She can afford to fly all over the place and do nice things for people. Her marriage has been riddled with telling these little white lies or hiding things from one another. Now she is Sarah's friend as well ~ a revivalist, beauty queen, who with her Assembly of God roots will try to lead us all to salvation. Hillary is much more of the woman I would want to align myself with.
Cindy is 54; Michelle is 44
x
What is Cindy doing to the jews? This is news.
x
The post was addressing someone else's son, not Cindy's, I believe.
.
I'm sure you defend Cindy Sheehan just the same, don't you?
Not a bet I'd take.
Cindy McCain is a "druggie"?
nm
I wonder what Cindy McCain really thinks about
,
You don't get more elitist than Cindy McCain
Botox, head bobbing facelifted freak. She was the other woman. Just a few years ago Repubs screamed family values and no divorce... now nobody mentions how McCain ditched his poor disabled wife for Cindy.
If Heather Mills could go on Cindy should
So many stars have gone on. Some I can't stand like Heather Mills (even though she is not a star - only in her own mind). I think it would be fun to watch Cindy.
Cindy's going home...Her mother just had a stroke.
She doesn't know if she will be back. I hope her mother has a speedy recovery.
They guestimate that there were tens of thousands of protesters there with her with over 1600 vigiles this week.
The Swift Boating of Cindy Sheehan
Op-Ed Columnist
The Swift Boating of Cindy Sheehan
By FRANK RICH
Published: August 21, 2005
CINDY SHEEHAN couldn't have picked a more apt date to begin the vigil that ambushed a president: Aug. 6 was the fourth anniversary of that fateful 2001 Crawford vacation day when George W. Bush responded to an intelligence briefing titled "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States" by going fishing. On this Aug. 6 the president was no less determined to shrug off bad news. Though 14 marine reservists had been killed days earlier by a roadside bomb in Haditha, his national radio address that morning made no mention of Iraq. Once again Mr. Bush was in his bubble, ensuring that he wouldn't see Ms. Sheehan coming. So it goes with a president who hasn't foreseen any of the setbacks in the war he fabricated against an enemy who did not attack inside the United States in 2001.
When these setbacks happen in Iraq itself, the administration punts. But when they happen at home, there's a game plan. Once Ms. Sheehan could no longer be ignored, the Swift Boating began. Character assassination is the Karl Rove tactic of choice, eagerly mimicked by his media surrogates, whenever the White House is confronted by a critic who challenges it on matters of war. The Swift Boating is especially vicious if the critic has more battle scars than a president who connived to serve stateside and a vice president who had "other priorities" during Vietnam.
The most prominent smear victims have been Bush political opponents with heroic Vietnam résumés: John McCain, Max Cleland, John Kerry. But the list of past targets stretches from the former counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke to Specialist Thomas Wilson, the grunt who publicly challenged Donald Rumsfeld about inadequately armored vehicles last December. The assault on the whistle-blower Joseph Wilson - the diplomat described by the first President Bush as "courageous" and "a true American hero" for confronting Saddam to save American hostages in 1991 - was so toxic it may yet send its perpetrators to jail.
True to form, the attack on Cindy Sheehan surfaced early on Fox News, where she was immediately labeled a "crackpot" by Fred Barnes. The right-wing blogosphere quickly spread tales of her divorce, her angry Republican in-laws, her supposed political flip-flops, her incendiary sloganeering and her association with known ticket-stub-carrying attendees of "Fahrenheit 9/11." Rush Limbaugh went so far as to declare that Ms. Sheehan's "story is nothing more than forged documents - there's nothing about it that's real."
But this time the Swift Boating failed, utterly, and that failure is yet another revealing historical marker in this summer's collapse of political support for the Iraq war.
When the Bush mob attacks critics like Ms. Sheehan, its highest priority is to change the subject. If we talk about Richard Clarke's character, then we stop talking about the administration's pre-9/11 inattentiveness to terrorism. If Thomas Wilson is trashed as an insubordinate plant of the "liberal media," we forget the Pentagon's abysmal failure to give our troops adequate armor (a failure that persists today, eight months after he spoke up). If we focus on Joseph Wilson's wife, we lose the big picture of how the administration twisted intelligence to gin up the threat of Saddam's nonexistent W.M.D.'s.
The hope this time was that we'd change the subject to Cindy Sheehan's "wacko" rhetoric and the opportunistic left-wing groups that have attached themselves to her like barnacles. That way we would forget about her dead son. But if much of the 24/7 media has taken the bait, much of the public has not.
The backdrops against which Ms. Sheehan stands - both that of Mr. Bush's what-me-worry vacation and that of Iraq itself - are perfectly synergistic with her message of unequal sacrifice and fruitless carnage. Her point would endure even if the messenger were shot by a gun-waving Crawford hothead or she never returned to Texas from her ailing mother's bedside or the president folded the media circus by actually meeting with her.
The failure of the smear campaign against Cindy Sheehan is yet another historical marker in the collapse of support for the Iraq war.
Certainly the Jews have suffered enough but not enough for Cindy. Educate yourself. nm
I heard your most high priestess Cindy S. is saying it
Cindy re-energized the anti war movement
Well, guess we are looking at different news papers and news programs cause from what I have seen and read, most of the country is behind Cindy 100%. In fact, it was her camping out in Tx that re-energized the anti war movement. If she was a quack or clown which is what Rove called her (takes a clown to know a clown), she could not have possibly started the ending of the Iraq war..which is what she did, you know. If you dont agree, I would suggest you study the ending of the Vietnam War. Nixon refused at first but the roar of the majority got too loud. As far as sacrificing a son. She probably feels guilt cause she feels that way as any mother wants to protect her children and not send them into harms way. So, if she had known he would die, she probably would have fought every which way to try to keep him out of the military. In her mind the guilt trip is she sacrificed her son..she should have *protected* him. I think that is what she feels. Me? I think when a child turns 18, they need to be on their own and make their own decisions..So, to me it would be the sons decision.
Cindy better watch her back. McWayne has
nm
I don't think Cindy McCain thinks period.
 Not at all impressed with her.
Cindy isn't interested in helping the victims down there. She's just mad they are stealing
her thunder. Hopefully, she will be relegated to the pathetic pawn that she is and real news of real importance will come back to the world. Every time she speaks, she puts our troops in danger. The troops even said so, but she is too far gone to listen to the troops. They are all brainwashed.
The rest of Cindy McCain's drug story is....
She didn't just "do" drugs and go to rehab. Sam left out the middle part. Cindy, the beer heiress, McCain founded the American Voluntary Medical Team (AVMT)charity organization. This came in handy when her habit was upwards of 20 pills a day (Percocet and Vicodin). She used her considerable clout to force one of the AVMT MDs to write illegal prescription drugs. When that wasn't enough, she resorted to stealing them from her own foundation.
She then proceeded to fire the whistleblower who had found out about it, who then turned around and tipped of the Drug Enforcement Administration and a federal investigation ensued, which she ended up paying for since she was guilty. That's when she told her clueless husband, the senator, since the feds were on her tail.
Enter John McWayne. The family staged an intervention and the senator exercised HIS considerable clout and had Cindy enrolled in what is politely referred to as a "diversion program."
Here's how this works. You pay a "program fee," attend classes on how how to avoid future offenses, restitution to the victims and avoid situations that might encourage repeating the behavior. This would be the "slap on he wrist and make it go away" approach to law enforcement. It you fail to meet the requirements of the program, they proceed with full prosecution.
Now some people's "program fees" might be other's "bribe and hush money." This program is pretty much out of reach to the garden variety drug offender who is not heir to a fortune and married to a senator. Those folks do hard time.
Cindy McCain did not use meth or crank or cocaine...
she was addicted to prescription drugs. Her crime was getting a doctor to forge prescriptions. She was using regulated narcotics...not illegal narcotics such as meth, crank, crack, or cocaine. And she wasn't dealing.
Cindy Sheehan not allowed to watch SOU address, was arrested.
Curiously, CNN reported that Cindy had UNFURLED A BANNER INSIDE THE CHAMBER WHICH IS AGAINST THE STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS RULES.
Half an hour later we learn that no such thing happened. Cindy simply wore a T-shirt with an antiwar message on it and was promptly hauled off to jail.
In Bushworld, you can not only be arrested and hauled off to jail for wearing a controversial T-shirt, but the major media will also make up ridiculous lies about you and broadcast them world-wide. That's some performance for a liberal press. But oh ho ho, we were all being so paranoid four years ago to claim that the press was a willing servant of deliberate Rovian disinformation spinmeisters. Once again, we are right on the mark and the Repubs? - blind and wrong and misdirected as usual - let us count the many things about which the progressive thinking people of this nation have been absolutely correct, and the Bush supporters oh so regrettably wrong. Wow, it would take pages and pages!
Can't tell them anything though - they can't admit it when they are wrong. The way things are going, they're going to deny us right into the communist USSR of 1965 - the state our teachers used to scare us about in 1965 - and we would think, oh, how awful to live in a place where the government controls all the media, where protestors are thrown in jail, where you have to be worried about speaking above a whisper if you criticize the government, because your own neighbor will turn you in! Oh those poor people, having their mail opened and never being able to see any real news, only what the govt. wants them to see!
But of course that was back in the days when dissent was patriotic, when Americans didn't spy on each other, when the govt. could not throw you in jail without a trial, when even Presidents had to resign if they wiretapped you without a warrant. You know, the OLD America, when nobody was above the law and citizens were shocked when the lies and deceit and self-serving greed of elected officials was exposed, instead of sniggering and giggling behind their hands about how bold their guys are, and ain't it grand they're still in charge.
Gee, I really miss it - was good while it lasted, and something to tell the grandkids about.
Thank God our troops
Okay...so you are okay with troops in ...
Afghanistan...just not in Iraq...?
Yes, has nothing to do with the troops.
And no, it does not make her a resident expert. Explain the differences of opinions amongst our own troops. Not all of them believe what they are doing is justified. Not every mother believes it either. It has nothing at all to do with being prideful of our sons and daughters. My point being is that their job is done. My brother is a gunny and is doing his job, but he no longer feels justified in doing it, and he is not alone. And I believe HIM. If the other poster is a resident expert because her son is in Iraq, then I guess that makes me a resident expert as well, no?
Yes, Liberal Thinker, and proud of it. I have not abandoned compassion. My agenda is to stop this needless war. My compassion is expanded to all not just a few. It started in my brain, and I am letting it spill out my mouth.
Yes. I criticize that with which I do not believe. That is our right is it not?
And last time I looked, this is a political forum, and a liberal forum at that.
It has nothing to do with our troops.
Why are you taken it so personally? You must realize that for every picture of sunshine your son sends you there is one that depicts suffering and starvation and death. I have family fighting it Iraq. It's doesn't change my stance that I feel that they are there unjustly. That's the real deal. Not quite sure how having family there makes you the resident expert. The point to my post was that we shouldn't be there anymore. Our troops have done what the Bush administration wanted done on the initial invasion. Now we are there fighting for an ideal that doesn't exist. So, in that perhaps you don't have a clue. If you son dies at the hands of an insurgent, those same insurgents who benefit from keeping unrest in the country and keeping it destabilized, a situation that our government and you refuse to recognize or better yet do anything about, I wonder if you will feel the same? Would his death be justified then? We are not fighting terrorists anymore in Iraq. They've moved on to other countries. What happens if there is another strike? Our troops are too thin and they are tired. Draft? Getting on your patriotic horse isn't help us end this war any sooner. There is no pride in this war anymore, if there ever was.
We have been paying Pakistan since 2001 to help fight terrorism. They haven't done much with our 10 billion dollars have they? If Al- Qaeda is to blame for Bhutto's death, then Pakistan should deal with it, and I don't believe we should be sending them anymore money. We shouldn't have been sending them money to begin with.
This is a widespread virus of Islamic extremism that we have concentrated mostly in Iraq while Al-Qaeda has gained strength in other countries while our military is being depleted. It is to their benefit this war continues because it destabilizes OUR country. Unless we have a full coalition from other countries to help fight this war, it cannot be won and we are wasting our time and our money on a pipe dream.
We do not have infinite resources to fight a civil unrest that will probably never be rectified. This war was handled poorly from the beginning and it is getting worse by the day.
I don't think YOU are paying attention to what is really go on in Iraq. Do you want your son there indefinitely? How about your son's son? This is a religious war for them, it will never end unless we end it.
That's what the troops are supposed to be doing
The key word is *securing.* It's an extreme exaggeration to say that the U.S. was supporting Hezbollah by making sure a Suni and Shiite combined rally did not get out of hand, but it's par for the course of for the dramaticists known as the mainstream media. Poor and misleading reporting is what they specialize in.
Say thanks to the troops...(see link)...sm
nm
Oh, so that is your message to our troops...
Go to work and do your job. Just live with the protesting and ignore it?
Somehow, I don't think our troops see things that way. sm
I don't think that is a good analogy.
The troops speak
Replying to a post below, I thought this would be a good link in a separate message in case people skip over it below.
The US Military troops speak and here is what they say - 68% for McCain, 23% Obama. Here is the link below.
http://activemilitaryformccain.blogspot.com/
So if you take that, plus Obama has a 5 point lead over McCain in today's polls, plus the 11% who are not decided it is a very close call. November 4th is going to be an excited day for sure.
|
