From Jim Gilliam's blog archives
One woman with a story

August 15, 2005 2:18 AM

Billmon: "What could be more preposterous than the sight of the mighty GOP propaganda war machine -- built up with such effort and at such great cost -- aiming all its guns at one bereaved, 48year-old mother camped by the side of the road in Crawford, Texas? ... When your greatest fear is the mother of a combat soldier who wants to ask the president why her son had to die in Iraq, you know you've got some serious PR problems."

UPDATE: This week's Time has more on Cindy.

More from the archive in War and Peace.

One woman with a story (08.15.2005)

Next Entry: Julia Sweeney on life after God (08.17.2005)
Previous Entry: We're outta there (08.14.2005)

Read the 52 comments.

Sponge Bob:

Sheehan jumped the shark with her moonbat speech over the weekend, demanding Israel withdrawl from "Palestine" (wherever that is) and vowing not to pay her 2004 taxes (which were due almost 4 months ago).

Whatever legitimacy remained from her ititial protest vanished with this wild-eyed rant, and the fact that Sheehan has been co-opted by every left-wing interest group and journalist in the nation to rail against Bush and the war.

Whatever her motivations, Sheehan looks like a fool for abandoning her pleading family to rattle off a list of liberal talking points while demanding that Bush meet with her...again.

Mon Aug 15 2005 2:35 PM

Sponge Bob:

"When your greatest fear is the mother of a combat soldier who wants to ask the president why her son had to die in Iraq, you know you've got some serious PR problems."

One small problem with that statement, SHE DOESN'T WANT TO MEET WITH BUSH.

transcript from MSNBC:

KEITH OLBERMANN: The nature of the media coverage you’re getting now, the response from other families of soldiers killed in Iraq, all of that, from the perspective of your protest there, in a way, isn’t it really better if President Bush doesn’t meet with you?

CINDY SHEEHAN: I would think so, yes. I think it’s great. And if he would come out right now, it would really defuse the momentum, and I don’t want to give them any hints.

Bet her "handlers" are pissed she got off her leash to make that statement.

Mon Aug 15 2005 3:19 PM


This is something I blogged in newspoodles

I cant believe you people Natalee Holloway vs. Cindy Sheehan these two issues ARE NOT RELATED!!!

We dont know what happened to Natalee Holloway, We DO know what happened to Cindy Sheehan's son, he was killed in action in defending our freedom.

Although, I do agree not more should be known about the whereabouts of those people entrusted with taking care of Natalee on the night she vanished, I still think that the island authorities could do more (because a crime was committed on the island) to at least keep her mother better informed on the case.

Cindy Sheehan is a grieving mother; her sorrow is felt by anyone who unfortunately has had the sin brought upon them of having to bury her child instead of it being the other way around. That being said, her actions are an added detriment to the very sons and daughters she is trying to save.

Question: would the news media be so interested in someone camping out in front of President Bushs ranch IF that person were in FAVOR of the war?

This woman has become the treadmill for the left, they are corrupting her sadness and hurt for their own ends -Get Bush at all costs- no matter how many tragedies they exploit!

Mon Aug 15 2005 3:29 PM


Bush's handlers are the ones who need to get him on a leash. Support for him and his war are dwindling.

Shifting reasons for war inevitably lead back to shifting reasons for dieing in it.

No lame excuses, rich parents, think tanks, or birth right are going to rescue the President from this one.

He's accountable. He knows it. He's afraid to meet with her.

Mon Aug 15 2005 3:31 PM

Tom from Madison:


the news media are doing their jobs. Bush has spent an exraordinary amount of time on vacation while people are dieing needlessly in an elective war he decided to have. it absolutely IS news that one grieving woman decided to stand up to a bully President after he sent her son to his death.

What a sad commentary that he lacks the courage to look her in the eye!

This isn't about the media. It's a about a PRESIEDENT WHO HAS NO CHARACTER!

Mon Aug 15 2005 4:06 PM


The politics of this truly fascinates me. On the one hand, I (naive as I am) would assume that Bush's best option would be to invite Ms. Sheehan alone onto his ranch for a private talk. He could have his speechwriters prepare a statement which he could give her from memory, which showed that he sympathized with her loss.

On the other hand, one cannot argue with results. The Bush administration obviously feels that a meeting with Ms. Sheehan will lend her credibility. They've consistently dealt with critics by attacking their credibility and removing them from any position of power in the government.

Ms. Sheehan doesn't occupy any position in the government, but her credibility is a fragile thing. Whether people are gullible enough to fall for the propaganda about her remains to be seen.

Sponge Bob, above, is usually a pretty good indicator of the GOP talking points. The GOP will focus group the attacks, dropping the ones which fall flat and continuing to use the ones which resonate. Sooner or later, they're going to hit on something which they can charge Ms. Sheehan with, which although possibly untrue, will be impossible for her to disprove.

The rules of the Republican attack machine dictate that a person is guilty until proven innocent. By these rules, Ms. Sheehan is most definitely "guilty" of something. They just have to figure out what it is.

This brings us full circle to the question of whether people will allow the berieved mother of a dead soldier to be dragged through the mud. The answer to this question will say a lot about whether "Support the Troops!" has any true meaning, or is just a trite slogan for people who have sacrificed nothing for the war effort but need to feel like they have.

Mon Aug 15 2005 4:55 PM

Sponge Bob:

According to Paul, a person cannot have their own words and views repeated to display the individual's ignorance and bigotry. Granted this only applies to those people that have been "championed" by the left.

Tue Aug 16 2005 8:58 AM

Sponge Bob:

Cindy a year ago:

"I now know he's sincere about wanting freedom for the Iraqis. I know he's sorry and feels some pain for our loss. And I know he's a man of faith....That was the gift the president gave us, the gift of happiness, of being together." -- Cindy Sheehan, after her meeting with George Bush

Cindy after becoming a pawn of Code Pink:

"My son joined the Army to protect America, not Israel. Am I stupid? No, I know full-well that my son, my family, this nation, and this world were betrayed by a George Bush who was influenced by the neo-con PNAC agenda after 9/11..." -- Cindy Sheehan

Cindy's Supporters:

"Courageously she has gone to Texas near the ranch of President Bush and braved the elements and a hostile Jewish supremacist media to demand a meeting with him and a good explanation why her son and other’s sons and daughters must die and be disfigured in a war for Israel rather than for America.

Recently, she had the courage to state the obvious that her son signed up in the military to protect America not to die for Israel." -- David Duke

Tue Aug 16 2005 9:07 AM

Right Wing Robby:

AUGUST 15--The next well-wisher approaching Cindy Sheehan at her tent encampment outside President George W. Bush's Texas vacation home may actually be a process server. That's because the California woman's husband--in a curious bit of timing--filed for divorce Friday afternoon ....

Tue Aug 16 2005 9:13 AM

Dave E.:

Ad Hominem. That's all they got.

This lady really scares the crap out of the wingers here. Not one of them...not once...has written about 'what' she is saying, sans drudge's pathetic and dramatic twisting of a local papers story on her (which, that very same paper has no clue how the egg man could possibly misconstrue their piece on her; I'm surprised spongey had the gall to even use that universally accepted lie). Naturally, like paul points out, spongey has no problem with promulgating that lie.

By the way, spongey's weak little response sounds more like an indictment of those chickenhawk pundits trying desperately to smear her. Thanks for that, I couldn't agree more that repeating the pundits own words (as you tend to do) exposes the ignorance of their opinions. It's just too bad so many people are so quick to (or just want to?) believe them.

Everything written here attempts to discredit her as a person. Not one peep about her criticisms of bush.

Tue Aug 16 2005 9:28 AM

Right Wing Robby:

Lets not forget about the family letter..

The email is from Cherie Quarterolo, who is speaking for the family and is Casey Sheehan's godmother. The email, with the statement contained, follows:

"Hello again Melanie,
Our family has been so distressed by the recent activities of Cindy we are breaking our silence and we have collectively written a statement for release. Feel free to distribute it as you wish. Thanks – Cherie

In response to questions regarding the Cindy Sheehan/Crawford Texas issue:
Sheehan Family Statement:

The Sheehan Family lost our beloved Casey in the Iraq War and we have been silently, respectfully grieving. We do not agree with the political motivations and publicity tactics of Cindy Sheehan. She now appears to be promoting her own personal agenda and notoriety at the the expense of her son's good name and reputation. The rest of the Sheehan Family supports the troops, our country, and our President, silently, with prayer and respect.


Casey Sheehan's grandparents, aunts, uncles and numerous cousins."

Now some needs to come tell me why the rest of the families opinion is wrong and Mrs sheehans is right. But be careful, the second you say anything about the rest of the family I am going to say...

"How can the left win spin machine use their media sources to attack a bereaved family?" How heartless and cruel!"

Tue Aug 16 2005 9:33 AM


Cindy is a perfect example of the left, shrill, bigoted and unreasonable. A victim by her own design. She as also announced she will not pay her taxes anymore, that alone should draw the ire of the Howard Dean. .

Tue Aug 16 2005 9:58 AM


" in-laws sent out a press statement disagreeing with me in strong terms; which is totally okay with me, because they barely knew Casey. We have always been on separate sides of the fence politically and I have not spoken to them since the election when they supported the man who is responsible for Casey's death. The thing that matters to me is that our family -- Casey's dad and my other 3 kids are on the same side of the fence that I am." -- Cindy Sheehan

"Surviving son Andy, 21, supports his mother in principle but recently sent her a long e-mail imploring her "to come home because you need to support us at home," he says."

"I have lost almost every friend that I had before Casey died. My husband and I are separated, because he doesn't support my activities." -- Cindy Sheehan

Apparently her family doesn't mean shit to her - as long as the camera is in front of her.

Tue Aug 16 2005 10:28 AM

Tom from Madison:

The attempted character assassination of Cindy Sheehan by the right is pathetic, but IT WILL BACKFIRE.

The country has seen this war unfold. The majority of Americans don't want to perpetuate this sick exercise in futility.

I would suggest that the neo-con talking brigade who are firing verbal assaults at Cindy Sheehan, IMMEDIATELY volunteer to go to Iraq and fight this war themselves.

Attacking Cindy Sheehan is a shameless act of false patriotism.

Tue Aug 16 2005 10:35 AM

Right Wing Robby:

How about the family of Cindy? They wrote the letter 'attacking' her? Should they all go to war too? How about the husband? Should he go to war too?

Doesnt their words mean as much as Cindy's?

Tue Aug 16 2005 10:51 AM


"I would suggest that the neo-con talking brigade who are firing verbal assaults at Cindy Sheehan, IMMEDIATELY volunteer to go to Iraq and fight this war themselves."

Talk about a dead horse....

Tue Aug 16 2005 10:56 AM

Jim Gilliam:

"Apparently her family doesn't mean shit to her - as long as the camera is in front of her."

This really pisses me off. No! She is standing up for what she believes is right. She is a hurt, grieving, mother who has turned her sorrow into action -- and at huge personal expense. This is the noblest, most patriotic and humbling thing an American can do.

Tue Aug 16 2005 11:27 AM

Mike of the Great White North:

"Talk about a dead horse...."

Yeah, that horse must have been a real patriot. Unlike chickenhawks.

Tue Aug 16 2005 12:19 PM


Oh please Mr Gillaim, spare me this woman is being exploited by the left, her grief blinds her to this and your side isnt above using her in this way.

If what you say is true would the media care or even be there if she was PRO-WAR?

Allow me to show you an excerpt form someone much more eloquent then me:

J you disappoint me, but you don't surprise me. No war is noble as far as you all are concerned. The US is guilty. This argument is tiresome, boring, and specious. Why didn't the president's daughters go? It's a volunteer force! The president didn't "send" Cindy Sheehan's son over there; he volunteered. If she is doing anything, she is sullying his memory. She is making his life worthless. She is making what he volunteered to do worthless, and you guys, you don't see this. There are sons, there are family members of elected officials in Washington who have been and are in Iraq. It's not a great number, but they are there. But it's not a draft, and the president can't choose who goes. It's a volunteer army and everything that you said is doing a disservice to those who have volunteered to represent this country and serve this country and their families, and if I were you, I would be ashamed and try to grow up and get a little maturity.

Tue Aug 16 2005 2:36 PM

Tom from Madison:

To the neo-con war-mongers:

To debate this war is both important and righteous, no matter what your political persuasion. I encourage everyone to speak her/his mind on issues of war and peace.

To attack, try to intimidate, and silence those with whom you disagree is wrong. This is what the right is doing

I'm not surprised that Cindy Sheehan's family is not of one mind on this issue. I'm glad to hear their opinions although I don't share them.

Even if Bush won't tell Cindy Sheehan PERSONALLY what American soldiers are fighting and dieing for, why doesn't he tell the country?

This isn't just a rhetorical question, IT'S A PRACTICAL QUESTION!

People aren't volunteering for this insane war because IT CAN'T BE JUSTIFIED BY ANY OF THE CRITERIA PUT FORTH BY BUSH AND HIS CRONIES. Moreover, the ability of the US to protect itself from legitimate threats is being compromised. Would-be enlistees are wondering what other foolish war we might be fighting in the very near future. Parents are wondering if their kids will come home dead from Iran, Syria, or elsewhere.

Bush is offering a very bleak future to those who volunteer to serve him. Increasingly, the country knows this and is opting out.

Tue Aug 16 2005 2:37 PM


Attack? Yes, intimidate? Never, Silence? Don’t be an A$$%&*#!!!
Who tried to silence the Swiftboat Vets? What political ideology forbids the word: GOD to be said in public schools? Who has gone to court to ban CHRISTMAS decorations on public property? And now with some Republican help our very freedom of speech has been limited.

Debate on this war is costing American lives, something your side never gets tired of reminding us! We’re in it like it or not we need to/have to united to win and talk about the politics after.

Cindy Sheehan is losing the rest of her family (who need her in this time of grief) because she wants to sit in a ditch in Texas?

Tue Aug 16 2005 3:31 PM

Dave E.:

At the end of the day, to debate Cindy Sheehan is to debate the legitimacy of what we've done to Iraq as it slowly evolves into an Iranian client-state.

I'd be interested to see if RWR can provide names to back that letter he's waving around. It truly is exhaustive keeping up with the breathtaking level of attack expended just to keep the mother of a dead soldier quiet. Can one woman's opinion be that scary?

This is not a complicated situation people. Let the hardcore right believe there's some elaborate, sinister plot to discredit Bush. In fact, nothing can be further from the truth. The truth is that Bush actions are the only things that have ever been discrediting. The real propagandists here are those tripping over each other in the race to silence Cindy Sheehan.

Again, she absolutely scares the shit out of ANYONE that ever strained their voice defending Bush on Iraq. The level of attacks and there zeal doesn't surprise me. Business as usual for the wingnuts.

Tue Aug 16 2005 3:52 PM

Dave E.:

"We’re in it like it or not we need to/have to united to win and talk about the politics after."

Where to begin with this astoundingly nearsighted statement.

Fuck it. That one speaks for itself.

Tue Aug 16 2005 3:58 PM

Mike of the Great White North:

Dave E: couldn't have said it better myslef.

Sounds almost as insightful as "shoot first and ask questions later" or in a neo-cons case "shoot first and let god sort it out".

Tue Aug 16 2005 7:16 PM


Cindy has decided to put herself in public eye. Therefor she will bear the brunt of public opinion. She is an activist. That fact that her son died doesnt make her immune from public discord.

Further more the wieght of her opinion doesnt change as a result. Anyone walking down the street has as much right to say anything she/he wants and as much right to meet the president.

Stop using her.

Tue Aug 16 2005 7:53 PM

Dave E.:

I suppose this family is nothing but a tool also:

''We feel you either have to fight this war right or get out,'' Rosemary Palmer, mother of Lance Cpl. Edward Schroeder II, said Tuesday.

Schroeder, 23, died two weeks ago in a roadside explosion, one of 16 Ohio-based Marines killed recently in Iraq.

The soldier's father said his son and other Marines were being misused as a stabilizing force in Iraq.

''Our comments are not just those of grieving parents,'' Paul Schroeder said in front of the couple's home. ''They are based on anger, Mr. President, not grief. Anger is an honest emotion when someone's family has been violated.''

Go ahead. Start the smear campaign. But get used to hearing this opinion, because the tipping point has been reached. Bush is, inexplicably, still on vacation. Can he possibly make a worse political decision right now? Oh...forgot about occupying Iraq for a sec there.

When I served, I knew we were not a force designed for law and order. No way. We were/are designed to destroy other armies and TAKE territory. With extreme prejudice. This is a very obvious distinction, as clearly Mr. Schroeder can also see. The chickenhawks that run policy don't, and damned if accountability doesn't have a knack for tracking you down.

But we shouldn't talk policy. We should stay the course. Even if that course leads directly to the side of the freaking mountain. We'll talk about it after we're all dead. (I'm still shaking my head over that doozer NJ).

You guys can have all the opinions you want. Nobody is disenfranchising you of them the way you are trying to disenfranchise Cindy Sheehan of hers. The difference is when the EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE SIMPLY DOES NOT SUPPORT THEM. It. Just. Doesn't. Jive. Reason (should) take over in the face of the preponderance of observed evidence. However, throw in a nifty multi-million dollar a year contraption designed to obfuscate said evidence, and PRESTO! Wingnuttery you shall have.

Wed Aug 17 2005 1:46 AM

Dave E.:

Oops. Link for above citation:

Wed Aug 17 2005 1:47 AM

Tom from Madison:

NJ: of all the stupid things you've said about this war, this takes the cake!

..."Debate on this war is costing American lives, something your side never gets tired of reminding us! We’re in it like it or not we need to/have to united to win and talk about the politics after."

American lives, Iraqi lives, and other lives are being lost because of the idiotic decision to conquer & occupy Iraq indefinitely. Responsibility lies solely with the commander in chief.

He started an elective war without an understanding of how it was going to end.

People of conscience need to stand up and tell their elected officials when they're doing something stupid. Silence of people who know better is what happened in Nazi Germany. The last thing we need in America is a stifling of debate on the war.

Once agains neo-cons are placing loyalty above all else. A Democracy that fails to debate issues of war and peace really isn't a Democracy at all.

Wed Aug 17 2005 10:44 AM


How long is it going to be before you(libs) dump Cindy Sheehan? Six months from now are you(libs) still going to be her megaphone? how long ago did your side shout WAR for OIL well we're there why are we paying so much in gas? How long ago did you(Lbs) shout Bush is an idiot cowboy and it got you nowhere! then you yelled Rumsfeld should resign! Just recently you wanted Karl Rove's head on a stick where's that at now? As soon as the press stops covering Cindy Sheehan we'll see how long you'll keep taking up her cause.

I'm just waiting to see when/what the next issue/person you're going to run into the ground for your agenda all the while saying to yourselves maybe this is it.

Bad enough you attack people on the right (they know-it comes w/the job), but to exploit the family of dead service members for your own gain, to advance your agenda of get bush at all costs is disgusting, but i guess in this PC world of *IF IT FEELS GOOD DO IT* its just what I have to get used to.

Wed Aug 17 2005 11:45 AM


Above is mine

Wed Aug 17 2005 11:46 AM

Sponge Bob:

Something wrong with her "story"?

Bush shown kissing Cindy in family pix
Online photographs of Sheehans show 1st meeting with president

Wed Aug 17 2005 2:51 PM

Dave E.:

Is that a joke spongey? A story on a birdcage liner that cites Rush "I've got a cyst on my ass so please don't send me to Vietnam" Limbaugh? A fuzzy picture that is supposed to prove...well, what exactly?

Your posts are obtuse and pointless, and provide no substantive argument to advance whatever it is you think you're saying. I mean...muscle some logic out of your words dude. Expand. Saying "There's something wrong with her 'story'" is nothing more than a quaint non sequitur, insinuating nothing. Please. Walk towards the light. I want to help you be part of a mutually beneficial discussion here and help you stop making yourself look so foolish (which, of course, you have every right to do, and seem to enjoy doing so liberally).

For one thing, those pics mean nothing to me if the photo looks like a 4 month old took it. And even if it is her having to take obligatory pics with shrub, it doesn't mean a thing. Nothing. Picture this, and try to do it clearly: She just met the boy king. In that environment and under those circumstances, I don't care who you are or what you do, the very symbol of the office of POTUS carries awesome weight. Obligation would seem to follow, even if the guy sitting in the office was a former male cheerleader. In fact, part of what has really been her impetus was how the boy king acted there.

Of course Cindy Sheehan's opinion of the guy has become increasingly recalcitrant as time goes on. If you're insinuating that no one has the liberty to modify or embolden an opinion, well not only is that a wee bit fascistic, but I would imagine you and every other human would be a horrible example of consistency with this odd policy you're accusing her of breaking. She got angrier. WELL GET IN LINE. Who the hell isn't getting angrier!

Wed Aug 17 2005 4:05 PM

Jim Gilliam:

Ooh ooh! This is the new wingnut strategy... Cindy is a spurned ex-lover of George W!!!

Too bad W doesn't smoke cigars.. I think that's impeachable.

Wed Aug 17 2005 5:18 PM

Dave E.:

Scandalous!'s all clear to me now. Of course...she was irreconcilably attracted to his gorilla walkin, tough talking, testosterone supplement takin' demeanor. Yes, yes. Who wouldn't be? (and we wonder why the wingnuts are so loyal...does anyone else here suddenly think 'repressed urges' may explain the infatuation?)

But alas! Her love was unrequited. A tale as old as time. It's as if Keats himself penned the tragedy.

Wed Aug 17 2005 5:50 PM

Sponge Bob:

Crank up the attack machine, our champion has been proven a liar and loon.

Cindy Sheehan is a creepy individual. She's just a hateful bigoted person who'll say anything to advance her personal and radical agenda. She's a real-life version of the sort of freaks you normally find at Democratic Underground who has been given the MSM as a modem to spout her vial words instead of an obscure blog. According to her a Jewish conspiracy killed her son with Federal Government holding the gun. And she ain’t gonna pay no taxes anymore. Put her in a cabin in Montana and the FBI would have shot her a couple years ago.

MSM champions her cause, but have you ever seen a person garner so much airtime with constant voiceovers with so few of her own words being broadcast? Look at the posts on this site, no one has to speculate on her thoughts, they are clearly reflected IN HER OWN WORDS. Then liberals blame the right for smearing her WITH HER OWN QUOTES. Let American hear her please, after 5 minutes of her drivel everyone will wonder why the media is broadcasting stories about this hobo living on the side of the road.

Wed Aug 17 2005 5:59 PM

Tom from Madison:

Cindy Sheehan is illustrating the case progressives have made about the war all along. When she talks issues, the neo-cons attack her PERSONALLY.

I reiterate, the orchestrated hateful attack on Cindy Sheehan is only proving that neo-cons don't have legitimate reasons for justifying the continuation of this war.

They can't argue with her message, so they try to make her the issue. Problem is she's speaking from the heart and most people hearing her words are touched by her sincerity. All the neo-cons have are pathetic ideologically driven talking points.

This war is not supported by a majority of Americans. The 2006 elections will be very telling.

Wed Aug 17 2005 6:53 PM


This is a very simple story, despite all of the desperate camouflage by the neocons. After all of the revelations from the Downing Street Memos, the 9/11 Commission Report, etc., Ms. Sheehan is angry enough about the senseless loss of her son that she is determined to confront the man responsible.

Bush adamently refuses to take responsibility for his decisions. He has never, to my knowledge, admitted a single signficant mistake or failure. Ms. Sheehan will pin the blame for her son's death to Bush's legacy. There will be no history of the war or of the Bush administration which does not mention the stand-off between the most powerful man on the face of the earth and a berieved and powerless mother who dared to confront him with the tragic results of his blundering leadership.

Someone will make a movie about this, guaranteed. It's powerful stuff.

It doesn't matter whether Ms. Sheehan is being used. It doesn't matter whether her sister-in-law disagrees with her. It doesn't matter if she and her husband are divorcing. These are all peripheral issues.

And it's especially galling that the neocons - who use people like tissues, blow the covers of intelligence agents, fire anyone who isn't a yes man - that these people dare to talk about Ms. Sheehan being used. That is a twisting of words which befits the cold black hearts which beat shallowly in the dark recesses of the neocons' breasts.

There can come a time when a person has to take a stand and say, "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it any more." This is that time for Ms. Sheeehan. She is a true, patriotic American, a direct descendent of Patrick Henry.

I salute her.

Wed Aug 17 2005 7:33 PM

Dave E.:

I've never heard a modem spout. I don't think it does that.

Wed Aug 17 2005 7:54 PM

Dave E.:

A must read and a little perspective. Read the letter beginning with Mr. Northern:

To all the wingnuts - those are your intolerant feelings and words in action.

In the end, you won't even be left with the precious shield of "the troops" to deflect criticism of your disastrous deeds. The very troops you use as shields are beginning to see whose pulling their strings and getting them killed. Chickenhawks.

"You can always hear the people who are willing to sacrifice somebody else's life. They're plenty loud and they talk all the time. You can find them in the churches and schools and newspapers and legislatures and congress. That's their business. They sound wonderful. Death before dishonor. This ground sanctified by blood. These men who died so gloriously. They shall not have died in vain. Our noble dead.


But what do the dead say?

Did anybody ever come back from the dead any single one of the millions who got killed did any of them ever come back and say by god I'm glad I'm dead because death is better than dishonor? Did they say I'm glad I died to make the world safe for democracy? Did they say I like death better than losing liberty? Did any of them ever say it's good to think I got my guts blown out for the honor of my country? Did any of them ever say look at me I'm dead but I died for decency and that's better than being alive?"
-Dalton Trumbo, Johnny Got His Gun

Thu Aug 18 2005 1:08 AM

Dave E.:

Wasn't somebody in this thread talking about "using their own words against them"?

Food for thought there, spongey.


"Quotes from when Clinton committed troops to Bosnia:

"You can support the troops but not the president."
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

"Well, I just think it's a bad idea. What's going to happen is they're going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years."
--Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

"Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?"
--Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

"[The] President . . . is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy."
--Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA)

"American foreign policy is now one huge big mystery. Simply put, the administration is trying to lead the world with a feel-good foreign policy."
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy."
--Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W Bush

"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning . . I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area."
--Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)

"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our over-extended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today"
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."
--Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)

Funny thing is, we won that war without a single killed in action."

End of Story.

The wingnut community here should think long and hard about what exactly it is they are standing for. They are the ones being used here. The same people they idolize now had their hearts all aflutter over the commitment of forces to stop a legitimate human rights tragedy back then. But, they see no problem with killing thousands - THOUSANDS (in case you've grown numb) - of Americans over a country that: Was. No. Threat.

You are the ones being used.

Wake up.

Thu Aug 18 2005 1:56 AM

Cindy Sheehan:

:: jim's note: I deleted this comment because it is *not* from Cindy Sheehan. It is from someone who regularly comments here. I know who you are, don't do it again. ::

Thu Aug 18 2005 9:10 AM

Dave E.:

More sunshine cast on the Bush admins breathtaking incompetance. Just when you thought his administration couldn't possibly be that stupid:

This'll take decades to clean up.

Thu Aug 18 2005 9:30 AM

Tom from Madison:

Dave E:

right you are.

I would also add that John Kerry pointed all the major points out in broad terms before the election. Bush kept insisting that situation was improving. It's now obvious that HE WAS DEAD WRONG and probably lieing as well.

I'm concerned about legitimate threats to security we might encounter. E.g. North Korea. What happens if we need global cooperation from allies? Would they believe as after the Iraq fiasco? We have given other nations a lot of reasons not to trust the judgment of our leader, especially when it comes to war and peace.

Thu Aug 18 2005 1:28 PM


Nice quotes, tell me what side were you on (of those quotes)?
Were you on the side of those you quoted OR were you on Clinton’s side?

‘Cause I’ll go on record right now THEY ARE WRONG!!!! Those people are entitled to their opinion but they are wrong!

Try this with your significant other “Honey I love you but I hate everything you do” see how that goes over.

I served under Clinton I didn’t like it but I did. He was my Commander-in-Chief AND I respected the office of the presidency, I would have done for him (Clinton) what I would do for Bush, can any of you say/do that?

Cindy Sheehan has become a pawn for the left and the liberal media! Cindy has had her visit with the President (SHE HAD HER SHOT) and came away with glowing reviews about the President – NOW- She’s changed her mind, now she’s called the President the “F” word, she’s called him a fascist, and a terrorist (and this woman seems sane to you).

She’s gone from saying she’s just a “simple mother” to being the: “SPARK” the universe chose (can anybody say delusions of grandeur), she’s pissing on her son’s grave and doesn’t even know it, and she’s the leader of the “movement”.

How dare she leave Texas, how dare she have something more important then the ‘movement’ – so what if her mom had a stroke why should that mean anything to her? – The rest of her family doesn’t! The media’s exploitation knows no bounds.

There are almost 2000 families who have lost someone in IRAQ, AND maybe 14,000 military injured. So this woman (Sheehan) speaks for ALL of them, I don’t think so! WHY ISNT THE MEDIA asking them for quotes or putting THEM on CNN---- ANSWER**** BECAUSE these people aren’t saying what the media wants to report.

And you turn your backs to this her (Sheehan’s) grief has been perverted and you add more fuel to the fire.

Mon Aug 22 2005 6:02 PM

Tom from Madison:


Cindy Sheehan speaks for herself and for some others who agree. Just how big many is not known. Yet there are clues.

Poll-based approval ratings for Bush show his overall presidential approval at an all-time low. Support for the war is also very low. Opposition is growing and is now the majority view. The obvious question is why?

It could be liberal media bias.

That explanation is inconsistent with the obvious change in public sentiment. Here is a list of some contributing factors:

Bush's factual basis for this war proved wrong.

His war plans proved to be horrible.

Evidence of torture as a means of fighting terrorism keeps coming up.

Contractor fraud keeps coming up.

The situation keeps worsening.

Milestones of progress proved worthless.

Cost in lives and dollars keeps rising with no end in sight.

Chuck Hagel and other Republicans are critcizing the war. He's not a liberal. Bottomline: the sacrifice required to wage this war is not being shared equally. For those who are making the sacrifice, it just isn't worth the cost.

Bush's false support for military families is proving to be as worthless to Americans as his service in the National Guard was. We're not safer. We're in a lot of debt. Yet soldiers are still dieing.

Bush's explanations aren't cutting it. Not for Cindy Sheehan and not for the majority of Americans. Progressives warned the country that this war was ill-conceived. Right now, it looks we were right.

Thu Aug 25 2005 11:48 AM


Sorry Sheehan doesn’t speak for herself, listen to her - she's the leader of the movement now. She not only lost her son BUT the rest of her family as well and she doesn’t care.

Like I've said B4 polls turn on a dime and Bush doesn’t stick his finger in the air to see which way the political winds blow.

"That explanation is inconsistent with the obvious change in public sentiment." – of course not, because Bush isn’t a liberal he can do no right no matter what he does.

It took "U. S." till 1789 to have a constitution and that was in "peace" time, here the Iraqis have a constitution in relatively record time after being tortured for 30 years, all the while dodging bullets & bombs.

The terrorists wanted to start a civil war – it hasn’t happened
The terrorists wanted to stop the elections – it didn’t happen
The terrorists wanted the support of the Iraqi people – they don’t have it.

The liberal spin machine has been full tilt since 2003 and hasten stopped, I’ve got to hand it to you guys you’re A LOT better then the Republicans in that respect and because of that weakness the public has a bad view of the war.

Soldiers do more then just take ground and fight, they built: schools, hospitals, roads, but you don’t hear any of that in the media – you mean to tell me CNN can’t find ONE Iraqi that has a favorable view of the US?

All you hear about are “anti Sheehan” rallies in Texas; it’s not anti Sheehan to be pro Bush or pro War against Terror (but there’s no liberal media).

“Chuck Hagel and other Republicans are critcizing the war”. – What are their motives, why now? What’s going on in the background?

You just wait, the liberal media is going to find a way to blame Bush for Hurricane Katrina

Mon Aug 29 2005 7:17 PM

Dave E.:

Pray tell, NJ. You sound like you've been in Iraq from jump, witnessing all the flowers being thrown at us and swinging hammers in the streets.

NJ Said: "you mean to tell me CNN can’t find ONE Iraqi that has a favorable view of the US"

Remember Safia Souhail? She's the Iraqi woman Bush made the centerpiece of the SOTU address this year. Here's what she thinks about all the "progress" you thump your chest about:

"Human rights should not be linked to Islamic Sharia law at all. It should be listed separately in the constitution," said Safia Souhail, Iraq's ambassador to Egypt. [...]
When we came back from exile, we thought we were going to improve rights and the position of women. But look what has happened -- we have lost all the gains we made over the last 30 years. It's a big disappointment."

NJ said: "The terrorists wanted the support of the Iraqi people – they don’t have it."

You have no idea what you're talking about. None.

In Haditha, within the heart of the Sunni Triangle:
"A year ago Haditha was just another sleepy town in western Anbar province, deep in the Sunni triangle and suspicious of the Shia-led government in Baghdad but no insurgent hotbed.

Then, say residents, arrived mostly Shia police with heavyhanded behaviour.[...]Attacks against the police escalated until they fled, creating a vacuum filled by insurgents.
They have learned from last November's battle in Falluja, when hundreds died fighting the marines and still lost the city.

Now their strategy appears to be to wait out the Americans, calculating they will leave within a few years, and then escalate what some consider the real war against a government led by Shias, a rival sect which Sunni extremists consider apostasy."

The real war hasn't even begun yet.

Tue Aug 30 2005 9:34 AM

Dave E.:

Link for above article. A must read.,2763,1553969,00.html

Tue Aug 30 2005 9:34 AM

Dave E.:

In fact, for all of NJ's indefatiguable allegiance and dedication for his service to Dear Leader, he is hereby awarded the Kombat Keyboard ribbon w/one Chickenhawk cluster:

Cuz apologizing for Dear Leader is "hard work" and deserves recognition. Especially after your latest comment. Throw that baby up on your rack and swell the chest...maybe you'll get to two clusters soon!

Tue Aug 30 2005 10:00 AM



I apologize

I apologize for the fact that the Iraqis didn’t get their constitution PERFECT the 1st time! How dare the Iraqi people NOT get this right from the word go, I mean they’ve had two years! How long did we have? Do you remember the Federalist papers? How long did it take for women to vote in this country again?

Tell me something do you think Safia Souhail would be able to voice her concerns at all 4 or 5 years ago?!?!?!?

Of course there are areas in Iraq that are dangerous (especially in the triangle) and will continue to be for some time for the simple fact the we cant be everywhere all the time – if that were possible there would be no crime in the US, there are parts of: Biloxi, MS – New Orleans, LA that are also, people are looting and you hear gunshots in the streets because of Katrina. (Notice what I said before: “You just wait, the liberal media is going to find a way to blame Bush for Hurricane Katrina” you’re already doing it)

Now we see the true Sheehan come out, on a recent TV appearance on the Bill Mahar show she actually said “I’m glad I didn’t meet the president” QUESTION – Was not meeting the president her goal after the death of her son????? I am rapidly losing the respect I have for her because of the loss of her son. But I see now her true motives; she’s a glory hound! The photo op of her and that poverty pimp on their knees (cropped) and then seeing the REAL picture, so this is the democrat “Rosa Parks”

The support from prominent democrat political figures is deafening! Where’s Hillary?

Please answer this: If we’re fighting a war and our enemy sees/notices/finds out that we’re fighting/arguing amongst ourselves, do you think that helps our military or hurts it? Do you think that emboldens our enemy or makes them think twice?

So when I said “Debate on this war is costing American lives, something your side never gets tired of reminding us! We’re in it like it or not we need to/have to united to win and talk about the politics after.” I meant it although you don’t really care do you? I have REPEATEDLY said that if Karl Rove or others on “MY SIDE” would be convicted I would say that they deserved it. I hear nothing from the likes of you, you still defend people like Durbin who calls those I serve with, my fellow military members NAZIES and YOUR silence is DEAFENING!!!!!!!!!!! You keep saying you support the troops?!?! Thanks but with support like that who needs enemies.

Try your mantra from the other side and listen to how stupid you sound:

“I support the war BUT I hate the troops”

Wed Aug 31 2005 10:37 PM


I forgot one thing,

You keep calling me names, keep insulting me personally keep calling those who differ from your point of view “Chickenhawks”, keep doing that. It just shows what kind of people you really are.

P. S. I thought democrats & liberal were supposed to be… tolerant.

Wed Aug 31 2005 11:05 PM

Dave E.:

Man are you a nutter...

I'm intolerant of only one thing. Intolerance.

That's why your outlandish reasoning draws my ire...and you're demonstrably hopeless case, so names you shall be called. Grow a thicker skin, ya panzee. Geez.

But you're right NJ. Let's put all dissent on lockdown. It shall be decreed: anyone says one peep contrary to Dear Leader, put em down on lack of patriotism grounds.

We'll nationalize all media, get that pesky first amendment expunged, exterminate all current sources of opposition, institute state-controlled religion, and all sources of information dispersal will be controlled and managed by a select few True Patriots. After all, they know what's best for us, and people like you will lap it up like sweet antidote to the harsh reality that evokes that yucky feeling in you known as "what do you mean...Dear Leader reall doesn't care about my blue collar ass...?"

Thanks. Thanks for sharing with us the peculiar light of your reason. Thanks, but no thanks. I don't want our military being so flippantly used as an ideological policy tool, spread to the four corners when a major metropolitan city is destroyed. That's how I support the troops. Not by insisting they stay in Iraq to get picked off like sitting ducks. They're warriors, not traffic cops.

But you won't get that, and you never will. So you can choose to ignore me when my criticism stings, but, by NO means will I EVER stop calling out ignorance and intolerance when I think I've spotted it.


Thu Sep 1 2005 12:41 AM

Jim Gilliam
Jim Gilliam


Add to My Yahoo!

Last week's soundtrack:

jgilliam's Weekly Artists Chart