I May Have Been Wrong About Cindy Sheehan

Mea Culpa, Mea Culpha, Mea Maxima Culpa

from JoeUser Forums

NOTICE: i realize myrrander staked out a position on sheehan's protest and then did a near 180° reversal; now i'm finding myself in the same position.  i'm sure some of yall are gonna see this as flip-flopping but...hey i gotta be true to myself and while i can't speak for him, i'm sure myrrander does too.  

on at least 2 (perhaps more) threads discussing the cindy sheehan protest outside the president's prarie chapel ranch in crawford, texas, i did my best to repudiate claims that ms sheehan was, at best, a blatant publcity seeker who was using her son's death as an excuse to embarrass her president.

at the time i was convinced i correctly perceived her actions as those of someone who was doing all she could to help the president see the errors of his policies.

while working on my next-to-newest article about the stones' concert  Link , in which i expressed my surprise about california governor schwarzenegger's willingness to share his vip booth with anyone who tossed $100k into his campaign chest, i suddenly realized ms sheehan could have easily approached her mission in a much more effective manner without any of the drama or antagonism.

i'd totally forgotten the bush pioneers (those who collect $100k for bush-related campaigns) and, especially, the rangers ($200,000).    all rangers get invites to the ranch as a reward for their efforts.  in fact, a number of them have visited the ranch while cindy was standing out in the sun making a fool of herself.  

if she REALLY wanted to talk to the president--and this wasn't just some big hollywood production directed by soros or warren beatty--she could very easily have become a ranger and been driven in a huge air-conditioned suv  right in thru the front gate.

for those of you who are bout to start flaming me about how she's just an ordinary soon-to-be-ex-wife who is highly unlikely to have a lotta money lying around (since she don't own any oil extraction equipment nor is she a government contractor or anything like that) please hold your mouse long enuff to face reality.

she has-or soon will have--collected a fairly large sum of money from the government which, i believe, owes her a death benefit as a result of her son being killed in iraq.  while i'm not sure exactly of the amount, it will surely be more than sufficient to pay for her ranger badge.

there's a right way and a wrong way to do things.   sadly, cindy chose the latter.

politics
20,463 views 64 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
Heh, I seem to remember Clinton being used as a fundraising tool, too. Mmm, something about sleepovers, and temples and Chinese businessmen. Hmmm... can't remember. Anyhoo, they all do it. I despise it, I hate it when Bush does it, but it is reality. To me it is kind of like prostitution. Any benefit I'd get would be ruined by the realization I had to pay for it. I see your point here, kinda, I guess.

I have to say, though, you're always going to be judged by who bankrolls you. You just critiqued Bush on it, I just critiqued Clinton, and, frankly, when Sheehan started getting image consulting and organizational help from politicaly polarized activist organizations, she ceased to be apolitical.

If she's really serious about there only being 'one political party in the US' as she said the other day, then it seems like she wouldn't want to be perceived as the mouthpiece for either side of the coin. If this had happened two years from now, I'd bet she'd be sitting in Mickey Moore's seat at the DNC.

Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
As one who has had my share of agonizing reappraisals, I don't think you "flip flopped". There were many ways George Soros and Co. could have backed Miss Cindy in her attempts to have a 2nd chance to talk to the president. As you point out, there are ways she could have used her means to do it on her own. But those options would have deprived her of the exhiliration that must come with learning "how Mickey Mouse must feel". ;~D

Glad to see you come around, but to tell you the truth, I wish we were both wrong about her.
Multiplicity - Control multiple PCs using one keyboard and mouse
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
Kingbee, I'm having touble understanding whether you are kidding or not. I suspect you are, but the two responses above are taking you seriously. Huh?

Well, I'm going to believe that you're serious in the notion that she needs to prove that she is a die-hard dubya supporter by ponying up the cash first. Then, she could have her audience with the king. Think about that, baker and parated. Whether clinton was a fundraiser or not, is ridiculous. And what's even more ridiculous is that it always comes back to clinton, with you guys.

I do believe that lots of democratic causes have latched onto her cause. No doubt. But, I also believe that she is sincere, and is now the catalyst for the movement that the dubya dummies so badly did not want. That being a seriously organized anti war movement.

Hello, Cindy!!! Welcome to the doubters club. Those of us who actually do question the president on his motives and his backers for this war effort. From what I've read, although she has already had one audience with the king, that was before all the Downing Street stuff came out, and before she started looking around and questioning this whole stinkin' war effort.

So, good for cindy. She has solidified the antiwar movement like no one else has been able to do. And, even the mainstream media is now being more vocal about their questions about this war. Bout freakin' time. In fact, CNN just did a report about the inept and rather deranged intelligence gathering that was fixed around the policy, as was the Downing Street Memo, and which led up to the Iraq invasion. Heads are gonna roll, and it's gonna be this administration, as soon as they are booted out.

I AM AN ARDENT CINDY SUPPORTER. Yeah, she coulda cheaped out and ponied up the cash, quietly, and without fanfare. But, what would that have accomplished, other than lining dubya's political war chest, which would have ultimately been rather counter productive? Doncha think?.............
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
For the record Dabe, yes, I did catch the humor in the article, and even enjoyed it. It made what could have been a "ok, I was wrong, take your best shot and get it over with" and made it something that was fun to read. Whether Kingbee meant his Mea Culpa or not is on him. If it was all satire, he did a great job!

I'm glad you support Miss Cindy, especially her right to do what she's doing. It's just too bad she doesn't respect other mothers' right to agree with the president and the war in Iraq.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
It's just too bad she doesn't respect other mothers' right to agree with the president and the war in Iraq.


I suppose you can turn that around and say that mothers who agree with dubya have zero respect for Sheehan and her cause. It cuts both ways. It's really kind of sad, a damned if you do and damned if you don't scenario. If you don't believe in this war, then your child will have died for nothing, a lie. If you do believe in this war, then your child is still dead, and the concept of possibly believing that it may have been for naught is way too much for a parent to bear. Some actually do believe that this war is worthwhile, but those are becoming fewer and fewer. Too many people have too many questions that this administration has yet to answer. Frankly, I do not take their decisions on faith alone, like some do. I do not believe that dubya is God.
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
We'll agree there Dabe, "Dubya" isn't God.

What I was refering to with Miss Cindy not respecting other mothers' right to agree with the president and the war in Iraq is the name calling she has decided to throw in the direction of those grieving mothers. Apparently grieving is only legitimate if it is hers.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top

suppose you can turn that around and say that mothers who agree with dubya have zero respect for Sheehan and her cause. It cuts both ways.

I dont see the mothers who support Bush using Sheehan's son in their pronouncements.  The same cannot be said for Sheehan.  That dog dont hunt, and it dont cut both ways.

Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
The life insurance payout for active duty personnel is $250,000. If they get killed in combat, that increases.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
The life insurance payout for active duty personnel is $250,000. If they get killed in combat, that increases


so she'd only be able to qualify as a pioneer? i'm not sure how immediate access pioneers get but in that case...
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top

The life insurance payout for active duty personnel is $250,000. If they get killed in combat, that increases.

I'm sure she'll donate it all to anti-war charity.....

Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
"I'm sure she'll donate it all to anti-war charity....."


Which would be a cinch in her case, wouldn't it?
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
so she'd only be able to qualify as a pioneer?

Apparently so.

I'm sure she'll donate it all to anti-war charity.....


Heheh...yeah, I'm sure she will. I'm sure she got right on that.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
Yup, that now well known anti war org "Cindy Sheehan, Inc." ;~D
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
I try to find insight into situations from either TV or music. (I love TV). When it first happened I liked the Sheehan idea. A mother of a dead soldier wanted to talk to the man who sent him there. It had a nice grass roots feel to it. A "folksy" step back to another time when two people could talk about their differences.

Then she was joined by others. I thought cool. A visual representation of the desire of people who want to talk to the president about the war. No talking points, no slogans, just a "sit down".

Now it seems the circus is in town and I am remined of the song "Mr. Robotto" with the line:

"I'm not a hero, I 'm not a savior..... I'm just a man whose circumstances, went beyond his control."

I think her intentions were good, but others have polluted them.

IG
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top

Now it seems the circus is in town and I am remined of the song "Mr. Robotto" with the line:

"I'm not a hero, I 'm not a savior..... I'm just a man whose circumstances, went beyond his control."

I was actually thinking of the Opera Tommy, but Mr. Robotto works too.

Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
the circus is in town


Who's the ringmaster, Bush or Sheehan?
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
I think that Cindy could easily have raised the money, if she would have put her efforts into grass roots money rising. She could have managed to bring her problems out to the public and given the President a little black eye.

Someone is funding her stay in Texas; let’s get them to pony up. The Circus (and rented circus tent that is her headquarts) down there is not free. She has no job, which has been reported of. Her family and husband have left her, because of her antics.

As for the military "Survivors benefits"; she would receive the recently increased $100,000 death gratuity and $400,000 SGLI insurance. That would be a total of $500,000 or one half million dollars of tax free payments. In June of this year both the death gratuity and SGLI was increase retro actively for all combat continuing operations. But the SGLI is contingent on two things.

One: If her son had not requested to lower his SGLI payment below the normal level. Most likely he did not since all SGLI fees are waved in a combat zone. But it is not unheard of. I normally did not request over $50,000 when I was single, because I really did not think my mom would do anything other then gamble or drink it away. But now that I'm married, I max it out.

Two: Is she the beneficiary of the SGLI? Maybe his grandmother or other family member was named. It is also common for fiancées, girlfriends, illegitimate children or even complete strangers to be named by the soldier members.

But I would suspect that she would be the beneficiary though. If she was not, now that would a story in itself.
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
Lee, Good points. Also, with all survivor's benefits being specifically listed on the divorce documentation, she wouldn't have access to any of it until the divorce is final. So, there is no money of her own to be finaning the circus.... and that also being true, she wouldn't have that money to join the Rangers yet either.

Code Pink must be doing something with their money other than donating it to the insurgents who they have stated they owe their allegiences to.
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top
Also, with all survivor's benefits being specifically listed on the divorce documentation


Not really, Ted. Remember (if I remember right you are prior service) only the Death gratuity is next of kin and would be tried up in a divorce. But the SGLI is broken down by name, so the check goes to the individuals and not the couple. My guess is that he would have placed her name only. I have had the unfortunate opportunity to spend time looking through my units SGLI forms. I had noticed that the majority of the single personnel just placed the mother, with both parents following at around 15% and fathers alone at around 10%. Must be a motherly thing, ya know. But I also had one year of my own SGLI, going to a niece that was preparing for Collage.
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top
Frankly, I do not take their decisions on faith alone, like some do.


You need to understand and accept that some people disagree with you on the basis of their independent judgment & arrive at positions based on something other than blind "faith", dabe. I can't take your arguments seriously or consider any substantive exchange with you on a topic until you acknowledge that someone could agree with President Bush about something without being a "sheeple" or a "Bushie". 'Course, I understand you may not give a rip, but just the same.

Cheers,
Daiwa
Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top
You need to understand and accept that some people disagree with you on the basis of their independent judgment & arrive at positions based on something other than blind "faith", dabe. I can't take your arguments seriously or consider any substantive exchange with you on a topic until you acknowledge that someone could agree with President Bush about something without being a "sheeple" or a "Bushie". 'Course, I understand you may not give a rip, but just the same.

Cheers,


YEH!!!
Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top
I seem to remember Clinton


i don't care for billy much more than george (clinton, at least, isn't responsible for thousands of americans), but I've always found this argument "Clinton did it TOOOOOO" to be one of the stupidest, most idiotic and annoying in existance. I hear this one from school children a lot -- "so and so did it too, so that makes my doing it OK."

As for Sheehan, I can imgaine the Bushies sitting around saying "Now, how can we treat this bitch the same way with did John McCain in 2000 and Joe Wilson in 2003? Can we find her Willie Horton?" And when the rightie attack dogs swoop down on a parent of a dead soldier...well, that reverses my course pretty quick. I'd rather have a razor blade enema than go along with the likes of Bill O'Falafel and the rest of the party of Tom DeLay and Jack Abramoff.
Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top
dabe. I can't take your arguments seriously or consider any substantive exchange with you on a topic until you acknowledge that someone could agree with President Bush about something without being a "sheeple" or a "Bushie".


No can do. I believe what I believe and I believe that bush is disgusting and I cannot understand why anyone backs this crook and his associates. If you cannot take my arguments seriously, then go do your own research instead of disagreeing with me on blind principle. But, I guess that's what blind patriotism is all about.
Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top
That dog dont hunt, and it dont cut both ways.


I beg to differ.