It’s a simple question that our President can’t answer: What “noble cause” did her son die for?
It’s odd, but I always doubted that the old canard about bullies being scared is actually true. But here it is: Bush would only have to travel a few miles to put this all to rest. But he won’t or can’t, go face to face with a citizen whose life his leadership has irrevocably changed.
It’s amazing that the right thinks that they can win this by smearing the mother of a dead soldier, but they’re trying. And why must any disagreement with our elected leader become a cause for attack? What are they so afraid of.
Yes she met with the president once before, but life isn’t black and white. Unhappy with that meeting, and the progress of this war, she made a decision, grabbed her deck chair, and she carried out a plan. Now a president who was supposed to be on vacation (on the taxpayer’s dime) finds himself under siege by a grieving mother.
And Bush says that he “grieves”. Once again he tries to make words speak louder than actions.
I’ve got an inherent mistrust of demagoguery and heartstring tugging imagery. There are some on the left who are making this woman out to be a political innocent just stepping up to the plate out of desperation. This image making seems overblown, artificial, to me and it’s why I haven’t commented on this yet.
That said, maybe it takes a Sheehan to connect with folks in a way wonkishly, or worse ideologically, arguing about policy can’t. And I don’t know enough about this woman to really justify my natural skepticism. She’s no innocent. She’s been a political actor for a while now. And I’d say both justified and on the right side of the issue, even if I find myself sheepishly agreeing with Henry Kissenger, of all people, that we can’t just pull out without creating a major disaster. There needs to be an extremely deliberate exit strategy that includes not only training up the locals but bringing in a truly international coalition to help shore up the nascent government. The bitch is that this administration is so wickedly self-serving, delusional and incompetant I’m not sure how that’s going to work.
I just don’t want us pulling a Schiavo with Sheehan. She seems like a decent and intelligent woman, not some fringe wacko, but now the war opponents are lionizing her and trying to spin her into this massive symbol I don’t know how much of what she believes is really her or how much is what she’s come to believe as a result of her celebrity and powerful new friends.
While I sympathize with her, I think it’s appalling that the media mostly ignores the total insanity of our current situation until they’re able to turn it into a human interest story.
Thousands of people dead because of our president = a ok.
He won’t meet with a nice lady = STOP THE PRESSES!
It’s all in the presentation. I am surprised at just what a chickenshit the president is being about this. He could put it all to rest in a matter of minutes. Is he really that at a loss for words to justify the defining goal of his administration? Wow.
Actually, she’s really not a very nice lady. She’s a maniac who, after working on the Kerry campaign and seeing her horse lose, DISOWNED HER FAMILY for having the audacity to vote for Bush.
Cheap opportunism, pure and simple… no different than the lunatics who picket outside the White House on a daily basis. She already had her meeting with the president, along with other mothers of soldiers killed in Iraq. The difference? She’s trying to make political hay out of her son’s sacrifice.
My apologies: I see I have framed my comments incorrectly. Let me try again:
I think all conservatives are inbred morons incapable of independant thought and I believe with all my heart that our current presidential administration is, depending on the circumstances, full of idiotic bufoons or infested with evil overlords craftifly plotting the demise of all that is good and pure.
Even though I know the evil republicans engage in cheap demogoguery at every opportunity, I still cringe at the notion our noble side of the aisle (the people’s side, don’t you forget) might possibly be engaging in similar tricks with Sheehan.
In the odd event that anybody who does not toe the Qt3 ideological line shows up, I will summarily dismiss anything they may have to say by attributing their thoughts to whatever conservative pundit is irking me today.
Actually, she’s really not a very nice lady. She’s a maniac who, after working on the Kerry campaign and seeing her horse lose, DISOWNED HER FAMILY for having the audacity to vote for Bush.
Cheap opportunism, pure and simple… no different than the lunatics who picket outside the White House on a daily basis. She already had her meeting with the president, along with other mothers of soldiers killed in Iraq. The difference? She’s trying to make political hay out of her son’s sacrifice.[/quote]
I couldn’t imagine (and never want to) what it would be like to lose a child. Just thinking about it would drive me crazy, she has to live the reality.
Oh, get serious. Bush meeting with Sheehan wouldn’t put anything to rest, no matter what he could possibly say to her.[/quote]
I tend to agree with Milo. This is similiar to the debates when Bush was asked to apologize for 9/11. As if there is any right answer besides staying silent leaving the brass
I’ll try and frame this properly, but what she’s doing seems like something I would expect from “the other side of the fence.” And if the shoe was on the other foot, the non-conservatives would be villified for even trying to get points across or discuss her background.
Showing up here and parroting the latest attack points from right wing pundits simply makes my eyes glaze over. I’m perfectly willing to entertain rational arguments from people with whom I disagree. So if you want a little respect around here, argue from data, not from a knee jerk desire to defend your righteous cause.
As for the issue at hand…
While I may agree with some folks (milo) that it’s really a lose-lose situation for Bush, he should then think, “how do I want to lose?”
Right now, he looks like a graceless chicken. That other icon of conservative values, Ronald Reagan, would never have let this situation go this far. He would have shown up, shaken a lot of hands, looked sad and gotten lots of press coverage for being graceful about the situation. I certainly disagreed with a lot of Reagan’s policies, but I certainly can’t fault his courage and the ability to show grace under pressure.
Um… sorry to upset your two dimensional thinking, but this woman is cracked. Sheehan previously met with President Bush, as her hometown paper, the Reporter of Vacaville, Calif., reported in June 2004. At the time, although she clearly held antiwar views, she pronounced herself pleased with the meeting:
Sincerity was something Cindy had hoped to find in the meeting. Shortly after Casey died, Bush sent the family a form letter expressing his condolences, and Cindy said she felt it was an impersonal gesture.
“I now know he’s sincere about wanting freedom for the Iraqis,” Cindy said after their meeting. “I know he’s sorry and feels some pain for our loss. And I know he’s a man of faith.” . . .
The trip had one benefit that none of the Sheehans expected.
For a moment, life returned to the way it was before Casey died. They laughed, joked and bickered playfully as they briefly toured Seattle.
For the first time in 11 weeks, they felt whole again.
“That was the gift the president gave us, the gift of happiness, of being together,” Cindy said.
“…conservatives are inbred morons incapable of independant thought…” Pathetic. :lol:
