Friday, 26 August 2005 - 6:19 AM CDT

What's "disgusting" to you is that she is pointing out that the Emperor has no clothes.

You guys have very nasty ad hominem tactics: call someone who disagrees "un-American" and impugn the sincerity of their statements by labelling them "tools."

I guess that's your only recourse when the facts are against you?

Friday, 26 August 2005 - 7:19 AM CDT

So was the guy who blew up those children in Iraq a freedom fighter? Or was he a Minute Man? I'm confused.

Friday, 26 August 2005 - 9:29 AM CDT

"Freedom Fighters...have created more terrorism by going into an Islamic country, devastating the country and killing innocent people in that country."

You are confused, all right. You have confused yourself with a false dichotomy, Rob. Two terms; one person. It is quite clear that Cindy Sheehan views the "freedom fighters" as terrorists who are devastating Iraq and killing innocent people. They view themselves as "freedom fighters" and the way I read it she was trying to convey the sense of their motivation in pouring over the borders into Iraq, Bush's fly paper zone.

Her facts are indisputable. She has the right to speak. She is a patriotic American voicing dissent. If dissent bothers you, you are in the wrong country.

Friday, 26 August 2005 - 1:54 PM CDT

Why am I not surprised that you don't find fault with Mother Sheehan's characterization of jihadist murderers as "freedom fighters"? It's an absolute fucking outrage. Whose freedom are these vermin fighting for? What political message is there in exploding a car bomb in the middle of a throng of Iraqi children getting sweets from American servicemen?

Words matter. Hers (and yours, apparently) reveal too much about which side in this war you think is right.

Friday, 26 August 2005 - 4:14 PM CDT

The absolute outrage is your arrogance in continuing to characterize her - and now me, apparently - as on the side of the enemy. For the love of God, TP, the woman gave her son to the cause. Have you done as much for America? Has your mother sent a son to Iraq? How dare you question Cindy's loyalty or patriotism.

Also, she didn't characterize them as freedom fighters. She referred to them with those words; she characterized them as terrorists and as killers of innocent people and as destroyers.

No surprise with your lame smears. These tactics are de rigeur on rightwing blogs. Because the facts and now 60% of the American people are against you, your only recourse is to characterize any who disagree with you as pro-terrorist or al-Qaeda sympathizers. That's disgusting and also not a little ironic, considering that the policies which you support have boosted the recruitment of new terrorists, have brought waves of new terorists pouring into Iraq, have made our troops in Iraq more open to terrorist attack, and have increased the likelihood that the United States mainland itself will be subject to further terrorist attack.

Saturday, 27 August 2005 - 12:30 PM CDT

Cindy Sheehan did not GIVE her son to the cause. She did not SEND her son to Iraq. Her son is the patriot here, not her. He, an adult, joined the military on his own, and it is HE who gave his life for us. Certainly, Cindy must have done something right, to raise such a patriotic, selfless son, but the constant tide leftists glorifying her as a martyr for her son's death is only cheapening her son's service and sacrifice.

Her son is the hero here. Cindy is the sad mom, who is dealing with her terrible loss by channeling her grief into an attack on those she blames for the death of her son. Clearly, she is still in the "Anger" stage of the grief process, which as any grief counsellor, psychiatrist or psychologist will tell you, is wrought with mis-directed anger and blame (i.e., when a baby dies, parents often baselessly blame each other).

I do not claim that she is a bad person - just a grieving mom, lashing out with misguided blame. The evil lies with those who glorify and encourage her to continue on her tyrade for their own benefit. Can you imagine the mother of a baby lost to [any illness] having a group of such venomous folk constantly poking and prodding her, encouraging her to hate and blame the dad (or the surgeon general) for the death of her child? Cindy will never be able to move past anger as long as the leftist pimps continue to whore-out her grief process.

Saturday, 27 August 2005 - 8:40 PM CDT

"Her son is the patriot, not her."

Oh really? I wouldn't let that slip out in a recruiting speech to high school students and their parents.

You are not a parent I take it, or at least not a mother. There never was a mother whose son went to war who did not feel she was giving her boy to the army and that she was making that sacrifice for love of country.

And anyway what's the evidence she is being used by "leftist pimps"? Because she wants to speak to the president who put her son in Harm's Way for a war which now turns out to have been based on phony pretexts that he fabricated? I don't think so. I don't call that "misdirected blame" at all. She'd be crazy if she weren't angry at George Bush. 90% of Americans agree she has a perfect right to protest the war, and 60% agree with her that Bush lied to get us into it. That's why she's a problem for the White House.

If there are any who are using her and trying to make her into a whore for their purposes, it is Bush's minions who vilify and smear her as "un-American" while the president's numbers tumble out of control.

Valerie Plame. Cindy Sheehan. In a week or so you'll be calling Gen. Janis Karpinski an un-American tool also. I have no doubt.

Sunday, 28 August 2005 - 1:43 AM CDT

Rider:

The absolute outrage is your arrogance in continuing to characterize her - and now me, apparently - as on the side of the enemy. For the love of God, TP, the woman gave her son to the cause. Have you done as much for America? Has your mother sent a son to Iraq? How dare you question Cindy's loyalty or patriotism.

That's exactly why the anti-war Left has taken up with this woman. Because they believe that she can say the same wacked-out bullshit that they do and be immune to criticism. Standard-issue host and parasite dynamic.

Also, she didn't characterize them as freedom fighters. She referred to them with those words; she characterized them as terrorists and as killers of innocent people and as destroyers.

Oh, I think we have all the context we need to know what her words mean.

No surprise with your lame smears. These tactics are de rigeur on rightwing blogs. Because the facts and now 60% of the American people are against you, your only recourse is to characterize any who disagree with you as pro-terrorist or al-Qaeda sympathizers.

Zarqawi or Ted Rall. What's the difference?

That's disgusting and also not a little ironic, considering that the policies which you support have boosted the recruitment of new terrorists, have brought waves of new terorists pouring into Iraq, have made our troops in Iraq more open to terrorist attack, and have increased the likelihood that the United States mainland itself will be subject to further terrorist attack.

These jihadist vermin are simply coming out of the woodwork. You think we're making more? That doesn't give the Religion of Peace much credit, does it? No wonder you have no faith in their ability to establish democracy.

Sunday, 28 August 2005 - 10:29 AM CDT

"There never was a mother whose son went to war who did not feel she was giving her boy to the army and that she was making that sacrifice for love of country."

“Never” is a big word – frequently used erroneously, and often by people who somehow think that by using it, they have proven their case. Do you have any research to prove your statistic here? Have you interviewed every single mother of every single soldier who has ever gone to war? This is just one of many glaring examples of your use of lies and misinterpretation to try to skew the facts in your favor.

Now, the next question from your pie-hole is sure to be “Yeah, well, do you have any research?” You are correct that I am not a mother, so I emailed your post to dear-ol’-mom. She did have the experience of watching me leave to fight in Desert Storm, so I asked her if your point was accurate. Sorry, Rider – a resounding NO. She did not feel as though she was “sending” me – in fact, if she had any say in the matter, she admits that she would not have let me go. She says she was sadly, but proudly watching me do what I had to do. Her pride was in me and my service - not in her country.

Again, you are robbing Casey Sheehan of the recognition and thanks he deserves. I’m guessing you’ve never been a fighting-man for your country, have you? If you had, you would not be so quick to bastardize this man’s service and sacrifice in exchange for the time you spend on your soap-box.