When are they going to send this Cindy Sheehan to Jail...

[catnap1972]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: DonVito
On the other hand, an angry grieving mother who has managed to effectively corner and embarrass the most powerful man in the free world is an interesting story. Moreover, the story is partially a by-product of the President taking such a lengthy vacation (thus giving her the opportunity to camp out in front of the "Western White House" for an interminable period). You have to figure the reporters who are stuck in Crawford, Texas for weeks on end in the middle of August aren't entirely happy about it, and I have to think this story is one way of allowing them to legitimize and vent their frustration about it.

imo, she's embarrassing the left more than Bush.

Sure she is. That must be why the Right is pulling out all stops to try and shut her up.

:thumbsup:

 

[Starbuck1975]

Sure she is. That must be why the Right is pulling out all stops to try and shut her up.

Last time I checked, the right has done absolutely nothing to take away this woman's freedom of speech...what the right has done, which they are quite effective at, is attacking the credibility of the messenger, and therefore the political viability of the message.

Then again, her message is little beyond an attention grabbing media circus, that will quickly and quietly fade once the next big story hits...she has at most a couple of hundred supporters standing by her side...if the protestors numbered in the thousands, perhaps it would have the weight of credility.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Not at all. Claiming this is about her son when it doesn't appear that's the case is a prime example of duplicity.

Unless you're her therapist, you couldn't possibly know what's in her head.

I have no problem with people criticizing Mrs. Sheehan, but it seems more than a little arrogant to me that thousands of people who've never met her assume they know better than she does how she feels.

I've had 46 years to grasp what's going on in people's heads based on their words and actions and in that time I've become pretty proficient at doing that. Many people are proficient doing that and are not therapists. In fact, if you have not garnered that particular capability yourself, I'd think you'd have a rather difficult time at your profession.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

That's because the "sky" itself is not actually blue. The color blue (among the other colors we can see at various times of the day and under various weather conditions) we see is caused by the light bouncing off of gas molecules in a process called Rayleigh scattering.

But who knows? Maybe Franken already knows that and it's you that doesn't.

You really aren't capable of agreeing with an "opponent," under any circumstances, about anything, are you?

 

[1EZduzit]

A Bush defender critizing duplicity in others?? :shocked: I think Cindy is the one with integrity

Charles Caleb Colton:

Nothing more completely baffles one who is full of trick and duplicity, than straightforward and simple integrity in another.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Not at all. Claiming this is about her son when it doesn't appear that's the case is a prime example of duplicity.

Unless you're her therapist, you couldn't possibly know what's in her head.

I have no problem with people criticizing Mrs. Sheehan, but it seems more than a little arrogant to me that thousands of people who've never met her assume they know better than she does how she feels.

I've had 46 years to grasp what's going on in people's heads based on their words and actions and in that time I've become pretty proficient at doing that.

At least you think you are but I believe that you are overestimating your ability to do so, especially in this case. I truly do not believe that she would use the death of her son for her own personal gain, in fact I believe that she is willing to sacrifice everything the is near and dear to her so other mothers will not have to face what she faced due to the Dub's ill advised and ill conceived Excellent Adventure in Iraq. That said I don't believe she is as effective as she thinks she is.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

I've had 46 years to grasp what's going on in people's heads based on their words and actions and in that time I've become pretty proficient at doing that. Many people are proficient doing that and are not therapists. In fact, if you have not garnered that particular capability yourself, I'd think you'd have a rather difficult time at your profession.

As it happens I have a Bachelor's in psychology (not that I remember much!), and I've seen enough sides of enough issues to know that I can't know everything about a person or a situation without talking to witnesses, looking at the scene of the crime, and reviewing the evidence. In this instance, it seems to me you're selectively ignoring what she herself says, as well as the opinions of the Reporter interviewer who's actually met her and talked to her about her son's death, and her subsequent meeting with the President. Your chronic, demonstrated stubbornness also, I suspect, interferes with your ability to make an honest assessment of a situation.

You'll forgive me for not heeding your counsel, Dr. TLC.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

I've had 46 years to grasp what's going on in people's heads based on their words and actions and in that time I've become pretty proficient at doing that. Many people are proficient doing that and are not therapists. In fact, if you have not garnered that particular capability yourself, I'd think you'd have a rather difficult time at your profession.

As it happens I have a Bachelor's in psychology (not that I remember much!), and I've seen enough sides of enough issues to know that I can't know everything about a person or a situation without talking to witnesses, looking at the scene of the crime, and reviewing the evidence. In this instance, it seems to me you're selectively ignoring what she herself says, as well as the opinions of the Reporter interviewer who's actually met her and talked to her about her son's death, and her subsequent meeting with the President. Your chronic, demonstrated stubbornness also, I suspect, interferes with your ability to make an honest assessment of a situation.

You'll forgive me for not heeding your counsel, Dr. TLC.

I'm basing my assessment on what she says, how she says it, her mannerisms (including body posture, facial expressions, how her eyes move), what she's said in the past, who she keeps around her, as well as some of the other issues surrounding her.

It seems to me you're readily accepting what she claims at face value and, additionally refuse to consider she could be anything less than honest. I've learned to trust my instincts reading people over the years as it's been far more reliable than the BS that eminates from most people's mouths. I can spot a BSer a mile away and, imo, Sheehan is a BSer. So we'll have to disagree on whether Sheehan is forthright and upstanding.

btw, I am no more or less stubborn that you or the rest of the lefty crew in here.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

That's because the "sky" itself is not actually blue. The color blue (among the other colors we can see at various times of the day and under various weather conditions) we see is caused by the light bouncing off of gas molecules in a process called Rayleigh scattering.

But who knows? Maybe Franken already knows that and it's you that doesn't.

You really aren't capable of agreeing with an "opponent," under any circumstances, about anything, are you?

I am perfectly capable of agreeing with an opponent. The circumstance is that they have to actually be correct before I agree with them though. ymmv.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I'm basing my assessment on what she says, how she says it, her mannerisms (including body posture, facial expressions, how her eyes move), what she's said in the past, who she keeps around her, as well as some of the other issues surrounding her.

Hey! You're just like "Doctor" Frist diagnosing Terry Schiavo based on a video and zero in-person experience. Classy! As I've intimated in previous posts, don't try and pass off your opinion as fact.

Look I could give two craps about Sheehan personally, and while I sympathize with her cause as she's laid it out, that doesn't mean I'm going to sit here and defend her ad nauseum.

But what I can tell you is quite interesting is the righties foaming at the mouth trying so desperately to tear her down and dig up dirt on her. The only reason the right is reacting like this is because Sheehan's managed to get a little media attention over her stunt. The only result of all this blathering and screams of "liar" and bad-mouthing of Cindy is that it will perpetuate what would be a short-lived media blip.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

I've had 46 years to grasp what's going on in people's heads based on their words and actions and in that time I've become pretty proficient at doing that. Many people are proficient doing that and are not therapists. In fact, if you have not garnered that particular capability yourself, I'd think you'd have a rather difficult time at your profession.

As it happens I have a Bachelor's in psychology (not that I remember much!), and I've seen enough sides of enough issues to know that I can't know everything about a person or a situation without talking to witnesses, looking at the scene of the crime, and reviewing the evidence. In this instance, it seems to me you're selectively ignoring what she herself says, as well as the opinions of the Reporter interviewer who's actually met her and talked to her about her son's death, and her subsequent meeting with the President. Your chronic, demonstrated stubbornness also, I suspect, interferes with your ability to make an honest assessment of a situation.

You'll forgive me for not heeding your counsel, Dr. TLC.

I'm basing my assessment on what she says, how she says it, her mannerisms (including body posture, facial expressions, how her eyes move), what she's said in the past, who she keeps around her, as well as some of the other issues surrounding her.

It seems to me you're readily accepting what she claims at face value and, additionally refuse to consider she could be anything less than honest. I've learned to trust my instincts reading people over the years as it's been far more reliable than the BS that eminates from most people's mouths. I can spot a BSer a mile away and, imo, Sheehan is a BSer. So we'll have to disagree on whether Sheehan is forthright and upstanding.

btw, I am no more or less stubborn that you or the rest of the lefty crew in here.

:roll: yup

 

[Stas]

HAHAHA, that chick is funny. LOL
What is she trying to do? She made a clown out of herself. ROFL

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

I'm basing my assessment on what she says, how she says it, her mannerisms (including body posture, facial expressions, how her eyes move), what she's said in the past, who she keeps around her, as well as some of the other issues surrounding her.

Considering you support Bush, I think I'll pass on your "assessment". I'd even suggest that you need to apply some of your keen observational skills to him.

 

[RichPLS]

I have not met a psychology major who did not need psychiatric treatment yet. Tends to attract them like flies to a light.

 

[CaptnKirk]

Hey !

News and sensationalism sells copies.

Regardless of the 'aledged' facts.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: RichPLS
I have not met a psychology major who did not need psychiatric treatment yet. Tends to attract them like flies to a light.

That is sometimes the case. In my instance it was more related to having a really, really hot female prof for Psych 202.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I'm basing my assessment on what she says, how she says it, her mannerisms (including body posture, facial expressions, how her eyes move), what she's said in the past, who she keeps around her, as well as some of the other issues surrounding her.

Hey! You're just like "Doctor" Frist diagnosing Terry Schiavo based on a video and zero in-person experience. Classy! As I've intimated in previous posts, don't try and pass off your opinion as fact.

It would help if you actually read what I wrote instead of jumping to the wrong conclusion.

Here's what I said previouly:

"Nope. I also believe she's shamelessly using her dead son as little more than a prop to further her newly radicalized political agenda. This "protest" seems to be more about Cindy than Casey."

So stop trying to pass off my opinions as fact, please.

Look I could give two craps about Sheehan personally, and while I sympathize with her cause as she's laid it out, that doesn't mean I'm going to sit here and defend her ad nauseum.

But what I can tell you is quite interesting is the righties foaming at the mouth trying so desperately to tear her down and dig up dirt on her. The only reason the right is reacting like this is because Sheehan's managed to get a little media attention over her stunt. The only result of all this blathering and screams of "liar" and bad-mouthing of Cindy is that it will perpetuate what would be a short-lived media blip.

Strange. The folks I see "foaming at the mouth" are people like Cindy, the groups supporting her, and many of the rabid Bush bashinistas in here.

The loopers seem so eager to jab Bush in any way they can, they're off and running with this desperately hoping it has legs. Like so many things they've run with since Bush has been in office, they're only ending up falling flat on their faces, once again.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I'm basing my assessment on what she says, how she says it, her mannerisms (including body posture, facial expressions, how her eyes move), what she's said in the past, who she keeps around her, as well as some of the other issues surrounding her.

Hey! You're just like "Doctor" Frist diagnosing Terry Schiavo based on a video and zero in-person experience. Classy! As I've intimated in previous posts, don't try and pass off your opinion as fact.

It would help if you actually read what I wrote instead of jumping to the wrong conclusion.

Here's what I said previouly:

"Nope. I also believe she's shamelessly using her dead son as little more than a prop to further her newly radicalized political agenda. This "protest" seems to be more about Cindy than Casey."

So stop trying to pass off my opinions as fact, please, and then jumping on your strawman high-horse. It comes off as pompous and arrogant which, frankly, is my impression of you.

Look I could give two craps about Sheehan personally, and while I sympathize with her cause as she's laid it out, that doesn't mean I'm going to sit here and defend her ad nauseum.

But what I can tell you is quite interesting is the righties foaming at the mouth trying so desperately to tear her down and dig up dirt on her. The only reason the right is reacting like this is because Sheehan's managed to get a little media attention over her stunt. The only result of all this blathering and screams of "liar" and bad-mouthing of Cindy is that it will perpetuate what would be a short-lived media blip.

Strange. The folks I see "foaming at the mouth" are people like Cindy, the groups supporting her, and many of the rabid Bush bashinistas in here.

The loopers seem so eager to jab Bush in any way they can, they're off and running with this desperately hoping it has legs. Like so many things they've run with since Bush has been in office, they're only ending up falling flat on the faces, once again.

Oh get real. This woman is within her rights to do what she is doing irregardless of what you or anyone else thinks her motives are. Supporting her right to protest has nothing to do with bashing Bush, it has to do with civil liberties. Everybody has them, even Bush haters. Too bad, so sad.

For Christ sake, get a clue.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: dannybin1742

thats funny considering this is a talking point on fux news, shutup, bill oreilly keeps mensioning these quotes from 3 years back, go to media matters or crooks andliars.com and see what she really said, fux has been making up quotes.

Considering all the talking points in here from the left sounding as if they come cut & pasted from DU and D-KOS (remember how to "frame" those issues, boiz), you have little room to talk.

Or ability, judging from that post.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Sure she is. That must be why the Right is pulling out all stops to try and shut her up.

Last time I checked, the right has done absolutely nothing to take away this woman's freedom of speech...what the right has done, which they are quite effective at, is attacking the credibility of the messenger, and therefore the political viability of the message.

Then again, her message is little beyond an attention grabbing media circus, that will quickly and quietly fade once the next big story hits...she has at most a couple of hundred supporters standing by her side...if the protestors numbered in the thousands, perhaps it would have the weight of credility.

Take notice how your sensible response gets no attention. Much easier to rant and argue with extreme points of view than discuss things intelligently.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Take notice how your sensible response gets no attention. Much easier to rant and argue with extreme points of view than discuss things intelligently.

Lamentably your sentiment rings true for the big boys in politics and the media as well.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I'm basing my assessment on what she says, how she says it, her mannerisms (including body posture, facial expressions, how her eyes move), what she's said in the past, who she keeps around her, as well as some of the other issues surrounding her.

Hey! You're just like "Doctor" Frist diagnosing Terry Schiavo based on a video and zero in-person experience. Classy! As I've intimated in previous posts, don't try and pass off your opinion as fact.

It would help if you actually read what I wrote instead of jumping to the wrong conclusion.

Here's what I said previouly:

"Nope. I also believe she's shamelessly using her dead son as little more than a prop to further her newly radicalized political agenda. This "protest" seems to be more about Cindy than Casey."

So stop trying to pass off my opinions as fact, please, and then jumping on your strawman high-horse. It comes off as pompous and arrogant which, frankly, is my impression of you.

Look I could give two craps about Sheehan personally, and while I sympathize with her cause as she's laid it out, that doesn't mean I'm going to sit here and defend her ad nauseum.

But what I can tell you is quite interesting is the righties foaming at the mouth trying so desperately to tear her down and dig up dirt on her. The only reason the right is reacting like this is because Sheehan's managed to get a little media attention over her stunt. The only result of all this blathering and screams of "liar" and bad-mouthing of Cindy is that it will perpetuate what would be a short-lived media blip.

Strange. The folks I see "foaming at the mouth" are people like Cindy, the groups supporting her, and many of the rabid Bush bashinistas in here.

The loopers seem so eager to jab Bush in any way they can, they're off and running with this desperately hoping it has legs. Like so many things they've run with since Bush has been in office, they're only ending up falling flat on the faces, once again.

Oh get real. This woman is within her rights to do what she is doing irregardless of what you or anyone else thinks her motives are. Supporting her right to protest has nothing to do with bashing Bush, it has to do with civil liberties. Everybody has them, even Bush haters. Too bad, so sad.

For Christ sake, get a clue.

How about you get a clue?

I'm not preventing this woman from doing whatever stupid thing she feels is necessary. But since she has decided to shine the public spotlight upon herself, she has opened herself up to criticism and, imo, derision as well for her less than palatable antics. If she wants to protest fine, feel free to do so. But give me the same courtesy to criticize her as a public personality, as is also my right to do.

It's funny that I don't see the righties trying to shut down Sheehan's protest, but the left sure feel compelled to shut down any criticism of her. How telling.

 

[Rainsford]

It's interesting...reading this thread, and listening to the conservative bobble-heads on Fox News and elsewhere, suggests to me that this is an issue that many conservatives seem to care deeply about. Or at the very least, it bothers them more than it should. So she doesn't like the war in Iraq...her son died there, I don't think that should be a surprise to anyone. So she's taking it farther than most people who don't like the war...I still don't see why this is such a big deal to anyone on the right.

Except it does make some sense from their point of view. Their image of America has "average Americans" as staunch supporters of President Bush and his various wars, while the only opponents are evil liberals who hate America. Because of this, dissent can't come from a grieving mother who's son died in Iraq, it has to come from a publicity grubbing woman who's dishonoring her dead hero son. It's a strategy favored by a lot of people in politics. Just keep smearing the source, and hope the issue never actually comes up. For anyone who cares, I no longer identify with the right in this country (and I used to, not too long ago) because this has become their main strategy far too often.

We can sit here and argue all day about whether Cindy Sheehan is a grieving mother or an amoral America-hater, but think about what I said...and look at the debate. For some reason it's all about her, instead of her point. Even setting aside the fact that I'm ashamed (but not surprised) that she doesn't get even an ounce of compassion from the right because she dares to think differently, the fact that she's become the entire issue there is just one more example of diverting the issue by attacking the source. And I got to tell you, I'm not real impressed by the way so many Americans keep falling for it.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I'm basing my assessment on what she says, how she says it, her mannerisms (including body posture, facial expressions, how her eyes move), what she's said in the past, who she keeps around her, as well as some of the other issues surrounding her.

Hey! You're just like "Doctor" Frist diagnosing Terry Schiavo based on a video and zero in-person experience. Classy! As I've intimated in previous posts, don't try and pass off your opinion as fact.

It would help if you actually read what I wrote instead of jumping to the wrong conclusion.

Here's what I said previouly:

"Nope. I also believe she's shamelessly using her dead son as little more than a prop to further her newly radicalized political agenda. This "protest" seems to be more about Cindy than Casey."

So stop trying to pass off my opinions as fact, please, and then jumping on your strawman high-horse. It comes off as pompous and arrogant which, frankly, is my impression of you.

Look I could give two craps about Sheehan personally, and while I sympathize with her cause as she's laid it out, that doesn't mean I'm going to sit here and defend her ad nauseum.

But what I can tell you is quite interesting is the righties foaming at the mouth trying so desperately to tear her down and dig up dirt on her. The only reason the right is reacting like this is because Sheehan's managed to get a little media attention over her stunt. The only result of all this blathering and screams of "liar" and bad-mouthing of Cindy is that it will perpetuate what would be a short-lived media blip.

Strange. The folks I see "foaming at the mouth" are people like Cindy, the groups supporting her, and many of the rabid Bush bashinistas in here.

The loopers seem so eager to jab Bush in any way they can, they're off and running with this desperately hoping it has legs. Like so many things they've run with since Bush has been in office, they're only ending up falling flat on the faces, once again.

Oh get real. This woman is within her rights to do what she is doing irregardless of what you or anyone else thinks her motives are. Supporting her right to protest has nothing to do with bashing Bush, it has to do with civil liberties. Everybody has them, even Bush haters. Too bad, so sad.

For Christ sake, get a clue.

How about you get a clue?

I'm not preventing this woman from doing whatever stupid thing she feels is necessary. But since she has decided to shine the public spotlight upon herself, she has opened herself up to criticism and, imo, derision as well for her less than palatable antics. If she wants to protest fine, feel free to do so. But give me the same courtesy to criticize her as a public personality, as is also my right to do.

It's funny that I don't see the righties trying to shut down Sheehan's protest, but the left sure feel compelled to shut down any criticism of her. How telling.

Here's a brilliant idea, how about arguing her point instead of resorting to personal attacks? You're free to criticize her all you want, but the fact that this is the only argument I ever see from most of you guys about anyting is "telling" as well.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Sure she is. That must be why the Right is pulling out all stops to try and shut her up.

Last time I checked, the right has done absolutely nothing to take away this woman's freedom of speech...what the right has done, which they are quite effective at, is attacking the credibility of the messenger, and therefore the political viability of the message.

Then again, her message is little beyond an attention grabbing media circus, that will quickly and quietly fade once the next big story hits...she has at most a couple of hundred supporters standing by her side...if the protestors numbered in the thousands, perhaps it would have the weight of credility.

Take notice how your sensible response gets no attention. Much easier to rant and argue with extreme points of view than discuss things intelligently.

That's a good point, and yet look at the OP that started this whole thing: "When are they going to send this Cindy Sheehan to Jail... for being nothing more than a STALKER to the president?"

That doesn't strike you as a bit harsh for some mom of a dead soldier? Now we're going to lock her up for protesting? And see, that's just the kind of over-the-top BS the right is throwing at this lady. Go visit freerepublic.com and take notice of some of the vicious, slanderous things the right is saying about this woman. Not to mention some of the vitriol spewed in this thread alone.

So let's discuss things intelligently, but with the tone set by the OP I doubt that's going to happen.