Cindy Sheehan finally figured out that her own party is just as corrupt.
Doesn't take too much to see that. I saw that years ago.
Warlock
Cindy Sheehan quits the fight
by CaptainSchmideo 29 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
dawg
Warlock, who didn't know that? I thought we were talking about how wrong this war was? I don't belong to either party becasue Machavelli was right about power. I think all views have merit. Yet, those of us against this war knew better and were called unpatriotic becasue we didn't support it... now that it's obvious the war was a mistake, how does it matter which party ends it? Somehow we need to get out of this mess.
-
SixofNine
Some background:
An open letter to Cindy Sheehan, from the administrator of Democratic Underground Dear Cindy:
My name is David Allen, and I am the lead administrator of Democratic Underground. Like the vast majority of people here on DU, I was surprised and dismayed to learn of your resignation as the public face of the anti-war movement. Even more upsetting to me is the fact that apparently a post here on my website was one of the reasons for your decision.
I am going to try to keep this note relatively brief. I cannot match the eloquence of your public statement, or the eloquence of the many people on Democratic Underground and elsewhere who have asked you to reconsider. My intent is merely to add my voice to the huge chorus of people who believe you are a vital voice in the anti-war movement. As the administrator of Democratic Underground I would like the opportunity to provide a little bit of context with regard the offending post referenced in your resignation letter. Having read your statement, I know that the post here on DU was not the only reason you made the decision you did, but it seems that that post may have been the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back.
The most important thing I think you should know is this: The vast majority of DU members support you and your efforts to bring an end to this terrible war. That has been true for as long as you have been fighting to end it -- as you know from the many DUers who stood with you at Camp Casey and elsewhere. It remains true today.
I understand how frustrating it is to give your heart and soul to something, and then get personally insulted for it. It is even worse when those insults come from people who are supposed to be our friends and allies. I am not going to provide an excuse or justification for that ugly post -- the person who posted it does not in any way speak for me or most of people on this website. But I am also not going to lie to you and tell you that it was posted by a troll. As far as I can tell, the person who posted it is a legitimate member of this site. (As an aside, the specific language used was not acceptable under the rules of this website, and the post in question was deleted by the moderators for that reason.)
Democratic Underground is not like all those other blogs, where one person (or a small group of people) regularly sets the tone by articulating the "official" point of view. I sometimes share my opinions, but I only do so occasionally, and I don't think of myself as a blogger or pundit. I think of myself as more of a "referee" between different factions. As a discussion forum, we see our mission as different from that of a traditional blog. Rather than requiring that DUers champion a particular viewpoint, I believe our members are best served by permitting a (relatively) wide range of opinion. That includes many viewpoints that I disagree with, and the majority of our members disagree with.
When you made it clear that you were going to challenge Democrats as aggressively as you challenge Republicans, you knew that many Democrats would not support your efforts. Likewise, it was inevitable that some here on DU would not support such efforts. You are a public figure, and as such the rules of this website permit our members to criticize you, just as our rules permit members to criticize Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid. If anything, such criticism shows that you are making a difference. You are being criticized because what you do matters. If your goal is to change the direction of this country, then there are worse things than being criticized by a small number of anonymous keyboard commandos on the Intertubes. Far worse that you be ignored.
If you simply cannot go on any longer, and you feel you must resign, then you have my understanding and my gratitude for everything you have done to fight against this terrible war. You have already done way more than anyone to help bring an end to the war in Iraq. You have earned your place in history, and you have earned the right to step aside if you feel you must.
But if you feel you still have some fight left in you, if you feel that you can still keep going, then I hope that you will do so. The anti-war movement, the country, and the world need people like you. Please do not let the criticisms of a few people get you down.
With heartfelt thanks,
David Allen
Democratic Underground -
SixofNine
And some deeper background, for perspective:
Bagism in the Modern Age Posted by H2O Man in General Discussion
Tue May 29th 2007, 06:20 AM "NAÏVE: When it comes to pointless propaganda, who can beat honeymooners John Lennon and Yoko Ono? They have started a week’s sleep-in against war and violence. Which seems a pretty naïve protest …."
John and Yoko included a 20-page booklet, titled "The Press," in their Wedding Album. Some of the articles included in it, like the one quoted above, do not include the name of the author or the newspaper.
Others do, such as Herbert Williams’ "These phoney stunts that call for no sacrifice." He wrote, "You can dismiss the seven day love-in by John Lennon and Yoko Ono as just a silly publicity stunt if you like, but I believe you’d be mistaken. I think they really mean it when they say this is a ‘demonstration for peace.’ But that makes it all the more contemptible. ….
"The contrast between the cosiness of the Lennon-Ono lie-in and the agony of Vietnam and Biafra is such that to claim one has any bearing on the other is a piece of colossal insensitivity. … It’s become quite fashionable to attract publicity by doing something which is bizarre, but not too discomforting. …. A token fast involves such minimal suffering that the world rightly takes little notice. People are too busy to bother about students’ stunts. The same phoney atmosphere permeates the demonstrations against American policy in Vietnam which occur from time to time."
Another article ("Yoko, Lennon Love-In ‘Disgusting’ ") notes that, "Being rich doesn’t mean everything. Pictures of John Lennon and Yoko Ono having a ‘love lie-in’ was one of the most disgusting sights I have seen. If wealth does this to people then I do not want it." The article goes on to say that the Lennon-Ono protest was offensive to the person’s deeply-held Christian beliefs. "It has been said that power corrupts. I pray to God this doesn’t happen to me. … There will always be freaks and exhibitionists who hog the television cameras while the Mr. Averages are ignored."
The articles and cartoons reflect the vicious attitude towards Yoko that was sadly common at that time. Part of that was because she was female, of course. And much of it had to do with her being an Asian-American. At a time when Uncle Sam was fighting in the jungles of southeast Asia, it offended some people to see her in bed with the former "mop-top" member of the Fab Four.
It was one thing to have that cheeky Lennon ask the people in the good seats to "rattle their jewelry." But under the influence of that dragon-lady Yoko, he started to meet with suspicious characters, and support offensive causes. There were people who hated them, and were extremely concerned about their peace campaign. There is a film "The U.S. vs John Lennon" that details this conflict.
At the time, John used to say that he and Yoko were willing to be the world’s clowns, if that’s what it took to make a commercial for peace. It has been shown since then that the attacks really did hurt them. I suppose that pain played a role in John and Yoko’s decision to take a step back from the public eye in 1975. (I also remember that all the attacks on Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., when he spoke out against the war, hurt him.)
Without exception, every time I have noted that I see similarities between the John & Yoko peace campaign and Cindy Sheehan’s campaign, at least one person will respond, "Well, she’s no John Lennon." And that’s true. Cindy isn’t John, and she isn’t Martin. But what is important is that she heard them, and she understood their message. They both asked people to do their best to advocate for peace. They both recognized that even the most sincere people may make mistakes – as they had -- and they made clear that it was important to not let the fear of making a mistake keep one from trying.
John Lennon and Martin Luther King are gone now. It’s no use waiting for them, or someone the critics might agree is just like them, comes back to earth to lead the next anti-war campaign. It’s time for the Mr. And Ms. Averages to do it for themselves. And when the critics attack Mr. And Ms. Average, like they attacked John and Martin, it means the peace campaign is on track.
Thank you Cindy Sheehan. -
Warlock
dawg,
My point is this: Neither party is for "the people". Both are for themselves and which ever way they can make money for their "real" constituents they will do it, even if it means sacrificing the lives of the young people in this county. By war, by peace by any which way they can.
As long as this war makes a lot of money, for a lot of people, the Dems won't end it, they will add to it.
Warlock
-
Who are you?
…When I started to hold the Democratic Party to the same standards that I held the Republican Party, support for my cause started to erode and the "left" started labeling me with the same slurs that the right used. I guess no one paid attention to me when I said that the issue of peace and people dying for no reason is not a matter of "right or left", but "right and wrong."
-
carla
Yes, I have children and many family in the military. At the moment I have family in all three major branches of the military.They were appalled at her behavior and her behavior did nothing for moral with the troops on the ground, air and sea.
Do I really care what this woman has to say? Do you think her behavior honors her son? She allowed herself to be used by many, instead of focusing on her son, her remaining children and husband who also lost a son she choose to react differently. She brings no honor to her sons memory. He was lost in her quest for media coverage, it became 'what is Sheehan up to now?' Anctics.
"Cindy (Sheehan) was in Crawford when a process server found her and handed over the lawsuit that would end her marriage. Cindy Sheehan had a boyfriend who is a major anti-war activist, Lew Rockwell. Cindy Sheehan took refuge with a computer that became her companion day and night. Cindy Sheehan?s former sister-in-law says ?Cindy had become addicted to online chat rooms of a pornographic nature. She had many men communicating with her. ? When she left her home, she also left behind evidence of her pornography addictions and her dalliances. The Sheehan family?s deterioration was punctuated by painful evidence of Cindy?s liaisons in hundreds of explicit e-mails and instant messages. (pp. 170-172)"
MOTHER SHEEHAN'S MARRIED LOVER
Activist breaks camp in Crawford to do 'damage control'
Cindy Sheehan packed her bags and left Crawford ,Texas, Tuesday afternoon and arrived home in Berkeley, Ca. late Tuesday evening. Sheehan rushed back to do damage control after explosive information became public today about an alleged affair that began while she was still married to her husband Patrick, and after her son Casey Sheehan died in Sadr City, Iraq attempting to rescue members of his trapped squad.
Sources are telling authors Melanie Morgan and Catherine Moy, (American Mourning, Cumberland Press) that Sheehan is furious that the news of her affair has gone public. Sources have identified the boyfriend as former right-winger Lew Rockwell of the Ludwig Von Mises think tank located in Alabama, who is himself married.
Sheehan was in Texas for over a week to confront President Bush about the war in Iraq, demanding a second meeting with the man she calls a 'murderous b*stard.'
Sources say that Sheehan met Lew Rockwell in an Internet chatroom, and exchanged 600 text mail messages before her husband learned of the affair through phone records.
Rockwell, who has a blog at HuffingtonPost.com and his own website www.lewrockwell.com has not responded to inquiries for comment."
--------------------------------------------------------------
Editorial Reviews
American Mourning: The Intimate Story of Two Families Joined by War, Torn by Beliefs (Hardcover)
Review
by Catherine Moy (Author), Melanie Morgan (Author)
AMERICAN Mourning" is an elegantly lyrical book about soldiers and sons killed in combat. The authors compare how two American families - the Sheehans and the Johnsons - reacted to the loss of their sons in combat in Iraq, and how they are in many ways a metaphor for the country itself. The story juxtaposes the grieving process of the two families - especially Cindy Sheehan, Casey's mother, and Joe Johnson, Justin's father, showing how each reacted to the worst news a parent can receive in radically different ways. Cindy Sheehan directed her grief and anger not at the terrorists whom she called "freedom fighters." She said that she "did not blame the man who killed Casey" but instead blamed President Bush whom she holds accountable for the lost soldiers. Joe Johnson's grief also flared as white-hot anger, and at age 45 he joined the National Guard determined to go to Iraq as a gunner and "kill the bastards" who killed his beloved Justin. The media portrayed Cindy as "Mother Sheehan," a grief-stricken mother whose world had been destroyed and who wished only to be consoled by President Bush. But the authors recount a back-story that documents a massive, highly professional and well-orchestrated PR campaign backed by deep-pocketed sponsors like MoveOn.org and George Soros. At some point Sheehan morphed into an aggressive feminist who abandoned her family, ran off with another man and embraced the radical agenda that the anti-Bush movement used her to promote. Joe Johnson trained hard, went to Iraq and patrolled the deadly roads laced with IEDs and ambushes. He resumed drinking after Justin's death and reportedly continues to seek solace in the bottle, though he has given up his mission of personally avenging his son's loss by killing terrorists. Both Cindy and Joe put their spouses and families through additional stress by internalizing their anger and abandoning their families to fend for themselves. Cindy left permanently, while Joe eventually came home to face --New York Post, November 19, 2006 Let's not forget Casey- Casey Austin Sheehan (May 29, 1979 – April 4, 2004) was a Specialist in the United States Army who was killed by enemy action while serving in the Iraq War. He is the son of Cindy Sheehan, the anti-war protester also known as "Peace Mom", and Patrick Sheehan, a sales representative.
In May 2000, Sheehan enlisted in the United States Army as a light-wheeled vehicle mechanic, MOS 63B. It has been reported that he had originally considered enlisting as a Chaplain's assistant MOS 56M. (Sheehan had acted as an altar server during the Palm Sunday mass on the morning of his death).
Near the end of his tour of duty, the US invasion of Iraq began. Sheehan re-enlisted, knowing that his unit would be sent to Iraq. Sheehan's division, the First Cavalry Division, was sent to Iraq. On March 19, 2004, Sheehan's unit, Charlie Battery, 1st Battalion and the 82nd Field Artillery Regiment arrived at FOB War Eagle in Sadr City. Just a few weeks later, on April 4, 2004, Sheehan was killed in action after volunteering as part of a Quick Reaction Force to rescue American troops.
Casey Sheehan was awarded the Purple Heart and Bronze Star Medal with V for Valor posthumously for actions in Iraq April 4, 2004. -
SixofNine
"At the moment I have family in all three major branches of the military."
Then you should start acting like it. A good way to do that would be to proactively hold their civilian leadership accountable. Have you done anything proactive to hold the civilian leadership of the military accountable for the way they use the military, Carla?
-
carla
What? Because I don't agree with you?
-
Warlock
Then you should start acting like it. A good way to do that would be to proactively hold their civilian leadership accountable. Have you done anything proactive to hold the civilian leadership of the military accountable for the way they use the military, Carla?
Why don't help Carla and give her some of your own real life examples of how it's done.
Warlock
