Clinton to Sheehan: "I don’t want their sons to die in vain."

Hillary Clinton met with Sheehan and told her she can't support pulling the troops out of Iraq. From the article (http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0539,fergusoncamp,68174,2.html):



Why is it so hard for people to accept, even those who were lied to in order to get thier support that the soldiers have ALREADY DIED IN VAIN? THEY DIED FOR BUSH'S VANITY!

WAKE UP SHEEPLE!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I guess there's just so many words to describe Hillary Clinton. I commend the "rightwingers" for their excellent choice of language.

Hmmmmmmmmm this, my friend.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

till?

A toil?

A toll?

Wasn't that an extraordinarily stupid comment? Thanks for noticing.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

So my opinion of Hillary Clinton somehow feeds the Rightwing?

Please.

And be nice.

I just think people are way too trigger happy on slamming Dems. I am frustrated too, but jumping on the "whore" sounds all to familiar and old.

But, I'm also aware of what words mean, and I use them carefully. Judiciously, even.

Focusing on the minor details means you miss the big picture. Did you see what Clinton said? Shame on her, the craven whore.

without calling her a whore? What do her sexual morals (or your view of them) have to do with her despicable attempt to appear both for and against the war on Iraq?

Hillary Clinton is slightly better than one of my senators, Senator Feinstein, and I think both of them have failed to step forward and do the right thing by their constituents, in regard to the Iraq war. But it would never cross my mind to call either of them a whore. Maybe because I'm a woman and I know how truly offensive such a term is.

It's a business, and there's nothing sexual about the word, in my opinion. When you sell anything for money, and you do it immorally and without compunction or regard for what is right and wrong, you are a whore.

We have a term in the legal profession for certain physicians (and other expert witnesses) who will write reports or give testimony favorable to the side that hires them.

They're called "whores."

By the way, I'm a woman, too. So much for assumptions, huh?

a woman, that is. I was merely pointing out that it's a loaded term, one that is particularly offensive to most women, myself included.

I work in the legal field too, and am aware that some in that profession use the term "whore" when denigrating an expert used by the other side. It's not in much use in my office however, and I may be fortunate, but in my 15 years in the field, haven't run into the use of that term very frequently.

I find it offensive when a woman is attacked, for her politics or otherwise, by being called a whore.

I've worked in the law for thirty years, and we call people "whores" regardless of their gender. It's not a denigration, by the way - simply a description. That's probably where you're getting hung up. We lawyers have our own kind of secret language that might sound funny to civilians.

I've referred to Bill Clinton as a whore, too.

You're putting the sexual spin on it where it doesn't exist, so consider that.

for different folks. I've worked in law offices for 15 years, and other than a few here and there, most of the the attorneys I have worked with don't call people whores. Maybe I'm just lucky, maybe the region I work in has some bearing on my experience, who knows.

The term I've most often heard used when referring to the opponent's experts is "plaintiff's biomechanical expert" or "defendant's safety expert." Go figure.

you're not alone with the attorneys when they're REALLY talking.

Different strokes, indeed.

What are you talking about?

Look, I happen to have the good fortune to have worked with attorneys who don't, as a habit, use vulgar language, okay? I started as a legal secretary, have also worked as an office manager, and am now a paralegal for a P.I. attorney. I've worked for various firms in both northern and southern California. I've worked very closely with "my" attorneys. Have they used salty language at times? You betcha. Calling paid experts whores on a regular basis? No.

Just because you have one experience in your community, doesn't make it universal. I'm not saying no attorneys use offensive, vulgar language. Just saying that I would not agree that it is universal.

You say that attorneys have a secret language, and I'm not privy to it because I'm not attorney. I dunno, but you might be surprised just how much support staff really do know about the attorneys they work for.

Congratulations!

Your first line - "What are you talking about?" - is the perfect example of what I tried to explain to you; we speak a language that you don't.

That's right - you're not an attorney, so you can't know what goes on behind our closed doors. That's how it's supposed to be.

Oh, and you can't imagine what we know about you. After all, you're the ones who apply to work for us.

Whores. They come in all sorts of guises, but you can recognize them by their deeds. Try to remember that.

So when you attorneys speak this secret language, is it accompanied by lots of ball scratching and loud burps and other bodily noises? Secret handshake? Who wears the fez? LOL!

We just do business and we do things support staff don't understand. No need for you to get all worked up about something you've always known, is there?

Just remember that there are all kinds of whores, not just the ones selling their bodies. Some sell their souls. Like that craven whore, Hillary Clinton.

A little Friday afternoon condescension. Why am I not surprised that you would go in that direction? It's been informative getting to know you and how you think. It reminds me that superiority complexes are not restricted only to Repubs.

don't be surprised to find yourself looking up.

Craven whore. A term more used in the political arena than anywhere else, I think, and Clinton's comment to Ms. Sheehan about bringing the soldiers home is about as craven as her comments about a woman's right to choose.

Keep that in mind.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Why do I keep hearing "Fortunate Son" in my head?

(The Bob Seger version)

:thumbsup:

If she's afraid to be associated with Cindy because she's perceived as representing a fringe group or minority opinion, Hillary needs to get outside of the Beltway more often.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

She sounds like Bush. The majority of americans would disagree with both of them. Well, if she does run for president, she won't get the nomination, so there's no since on paying attention to her anymore.

want the republicans to run against.

Then, the machines will let the person WIN the presidency that will likely take the heat for the mess our country will be confronting for the next cycle. And I guarantee you this: If they let EITHER the house or senate get a majority of Dems, they will STILL arrange for any Democrat elected to the presidency not to be able to do a damned thing, since they will NEVER allow BOTH house and senate to be controlled by Dems.

THIS is the reality of having a privatized election process, where votes are cast on these little machines with secret codes and no paper trail, and the votes COUNTED on machines that can be accessed and reprogrammed via modem.

:kick:

"The dogmas of the quiet past, are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise -- with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew, and act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country." -Abraham Lincoln

He asked him what was wrong with the dems, afraid to take a stand on Iraq.

I liked what Hacket said. Said was like they had been wandering in the desert for about 39 and a half years. They should be coming out soon.

He did'nt know where they were either other than they seem to be afraid to take a stand and making a voter mad.

And these fools are believing what they hear.

:kick:

"Die in VAin"..everything has been in vain since the bushwa coup..I cannot believe that enabler.

And her conflating Iraq with "fighting for freedom", calling it a noble cause just makes it double so.

them to kill more people in order that their previous victims did not die in vain.

:eyes:

don't have to fight them here"

added that just to top it off. :silly:

Let's get the hell out of Iraq now. The only one so far with the guts to say it is Howard Dean.

The Homeward Bound Act: HJR 55

http://kucinich.us/archive/report/display.php?r=37&d=2005-06-29+14%3A47%3A01

Kucinich has been speaking out against this war since Feb. 02...over a year before it even started, and has been calling for the troops to be brought home ever since it started.

Clinton is sounding more like Lieberman all the time.

It's like you people (and you deserve to be refereed to thusly) here had no idea what her stance was before today? Wake up sheeple!! I fucking hate DU sometimes.

:puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke:

What she said MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE. She is repeating a RW Talking Point as a reason for STAYING IN IRAQ.

People DO NEED TO WAKE UP and realize that IT IS UP TO US TO STOP THE KILLING OF INNOCENTS.

up like so much cream because the almighty clinton repeats bushwa talking points?

She has to beg, buy, or borrow a FUCKING CLUE!

Most of the posts are expressing their frustration over her Iraq war stance. I've defended Hillary several times, but when she starts sounding like Bush, I'm calling her out.

It's not bashing. We're sick of the triangulation talk.

:)

The wording is just a little too close, Spock. The "pukes" are a nice touch though. :)

Finest form of flattery they say :D

Happens to me a lot too - I usually just smile and think "ah, it's nice to have even just a small influence around here" :D

I am a bit fed up with people who act like today is the first time they've ever heard Hillary's stance on this issue. It's like they are thinking "oh boy, another chance to BASH Hillary on DU" as they rub thier hands together. As if we haven't noticed the same names REPEATEDLY bashing the SAME PEOPLE for the SAME THINGS. Some of us weren't born yesterday.

:eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes:

(I did the eyes this time ;) )

:)

At least if we aren't bashing the crap out of Hillary, we must be Nazi's, No?

:)

Soldiers who died in vain already + more who die in vain in the future = gives meaning to all of their deaths?

Wait, that doesn't work out. Let's try this again and see if it works this way:

Soldiers who die in the future in Iraq + soldiers who already died in Iraq + MORE soldiers dying = meaning?

It JUST doesn't make any sense.

First rule of finding yourself in a hole: stop digging.

sick Shit!

if we were to leave now, there would be a massive power vaccuum and what little infrastructure exists would collapse under its disorginization and wouldn't be able to defend itself. The insurgency would march on in and god knows what with it.

I want the troops out asap just like the rest of us, but to leave now would do more harm than good in an unstable region.

so I don't know if you realize what happened during Viet Nam. I still recall Nixon's Peace Plan with Honor, which the National Lampoon paradied so well. Anyway, the so-called 'plan' disintegrated and the South Vietnamese were left to their fate.

Yes, I realize that Iraq is not Viet Nam, in that there is not a viable 'enemy' government we are fighting. But do you seriously think that the so-called 'Constitution' the Shias and Kurds have crafted is going to go over with the Sunnis? Civil war is coming, with us there or without us there.

The destabilization of the Middle East that the United States invasion has brought about is the cause of the power vacuum, and it will only cause more needless American deaths for us to stay here.

The "insurgency" are people who live there, who know we have no business being there. If my country were attacked by outsiders, you bet I'd be an "insurgent," too.

What she "indirectly meant" is this, I think: "I'll say anything to get elected, pander to any group, at any time, anywhere."

Craven whore.

:rant:
She just said it all: "she can't support pulling the troops out of Iraq"... it wouldn't be politically prudent to getting the moderate vote to support a pull out, so she won't.

This is exactly the kind of sell out bullshit that Dean just sent out an email about - "when political calculations silence our conscience, we have abandoned our true values".

And don't get me wrong, I'm not just bashing Clinton. Where the hell is Kerry? He stood before Congress and asked "how can you ask a man to be the last person to die for a mistake?" Does that only apply to his friends that were in Vietnam? Can anyone possibly convince me that this war is RIGHT? That somehow pulling out in a month, three months, a year that will be different?!

Gov. Dean, I have your back. I'll give you cash. You speak for me. I'm tired of hearing Dems walk this tightrope to 'please'...

congratulations

...not Hillary, and I believe the original poster was paraphrasing what Hillary said. But I don't want to be accused of quoting someone out of context. So let me see if I can find exactly what Hillary said:

"“I think it is a much more complicated situation,” she continued. “I don’t think it’s the right time to withdraw, but we also have to stand up and send a message that we’re not going to be there indefinitely. We need to tell the Sunnis that they have to do their job and that we won’t be there forever. Because if you don’t, then what incentive is there for them to ever participate in the political process?”"

So, to paraphrase Hillary - 'we shouldn't withdraw NOW, but maybe in the furture once things get better'. Is that a fair summation?

You know what? My response is exactly the same. Hillary won't support an immediate pullout because it's too 'radical', it would be a bad political move.

BTW I have no agenda. All I have is anger. Anger that even when the Senate democrats realized they'd been lied to by this administration, they were/are still too worried that they'll be pegged as 'anti-war' wackos if they say 'bring the troops home now'.

I like Hillary. I used to live in NYS, and I helped to get her elected. I donated money to her campaign and voted for her.

But I do not believe that staying in Iraq will bring us anything more than dead soldiers. We need to BEG the UN to intervene, and get out. We are an occupying force; we are not providing adequate security for the people there as a result of our unilateral invasion with a small coalition which keeps shrinking.

I honestly do not see how we will get this country to a point where they can 'run themselves' unless either 1) we dramatically increase our troop strength there, or 2) we get a UN multi-national group in there. Neither of these things will happen under this administration... So my opinion is, as a citizen, I fight to help the anti-war protesters to demand a pull-out now.

As I'm writing this, I'm realizing yes, I guess I do have an agenda... My agenda is to bring these soldiers home right now, asap. I guess that makes me a pie-in-the sky hippie, huh?

:shrug:

"I believe we should have gone through with the inspection process and acted through the UN." IF SHE BELIEVES THAT THEN WHY DID SHE VOTE FOR THE WAR?

Within the same breath...

"But I believe that standing up against someone as dangerous as Saddam was a good goal." TO GO TO WAR? I don't understand... why didn't her hubby go after him in the 8 years he was in office then?

She OBVIOUSLY believes the war was WRONG but she WON'T say that it WAS.

And right afterward as noted in the article



Sounds like talking out of BOTH SIDES OF HER MOUTH AT THE SAME TIME if not waffling.

The only thing that can emerge is a Muslim theocracy, and there isn't a damn thing we can do about it. Junior has screwed the pooch on this one and anyone, including Hillary, that thinks we can turn this around is fooling themselves. We've managed to destroy any semblance of democracy they had. Every one that's died has died in vain. Every one that will die will die in vain. I don't dislike Hillary -- in fact, there's a lot I like about her -- but if she doesn't come around -- if the rest of the dino Demos don't come around -- she, and they, won't get my vote.

thing should be stopped now instead of Viet Nam redux.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

up to the kids to make their decision. What gives any parent to right to "sacrifice" their child.

...continuing in Iraq is justified on the grounds of America trying to save face? Because that's what her reasoning seems to boil down to, really.

Like *, they don't listen to what she had to say.

From the article...

“I know their offices are going to be working with us; all we have to do is keep up the pressure on them,” Sheehan said, adding, “Now it’s up to the people of New York to put pressure on Clinton.”

Keeping The Pressure on clinton.

As quoted from that same article....

"At least Clinton was willing to hear Sheehan and the other military family members’ plea. Republican representative Bill Thomas of Bakersfield, California, wouldn’t let them in the door, while Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist’s staff told the group they would have to fill out a written form if they wanted a meeting. When told they had already called and e-mailed several times, Frist’s chief of staff relented and spent about 15 minutes with the group, which included Iraq war veterans and members of Military Families Speak Out."

Give credit where credit is due. Cindy called on Bush repeatedly, and he doesn't have the guts to meet with her. Cindy called on Hillary, and at least Hillary had the guts to comply and meet with her.

Also from the article...

"Nevertheless, Sheehan reported feeling “fabulous coming out of the meeting.”

“I know their offices are going to be working with us; all we have to do is keep up the pressure on them,” Sheehan said, adding, “Now it’s up to the people of New York to put pressure on Clinton.”

So at least Hillary, unlike Bush and his cronies, is willing to meet with someone like Cindy and discuss the matter, which is the beginning of diplomacy or at least a form of positive dialog.

No offense to nobody, but Cindy Sheehan's call to unseat HRC was never going to even dent HRC's re-election numbers. Senator from New York is a freaking safe seat for the Dems. The only way a GOPer could beat an incumbent Dem Senator is for the Dem Senator to sacrifice extra fluffy kittens to Satan on live TV.

There was no way HRC was going to win, meeting with Sheehan. HRC couldn't say "You're right, the war was a stupid idea," because she would loose all credibility in the "Dems need to be tough on Defense" sweepstakes - - and she'd admit how bad her judgment and leadership skills are. All HRC's vacuous non-answer does is p*ss off the base - - as you're seeing here. It gives them one more reason to vote against her in the primary, or even the general election.

All HRC had to do was to ignore Sheehan, and find somebody credible to praise her bold, courageous leadership on foreign policy (or defense or whatever). Then the base here would have been cheering HRC on for proving that Dems are strong on foreign policy (or defense or whatever) and anybody who posted something along the lines of "I notice she avoided meeting with Cindy Sheehan, though!" would look like a wing nut. They would be harshly reminded that Smirk is really the one at fault for the war - - and most folks would agree with that. Sheehan's case would be weakened without HRC having to lift a finger.

But meeting with Sheehan makes Sheehan's charges seem more legitimate. It makes HRC look more responsible for the war, not less. It makes HRC look like more of a hypocrite, not less. Meeting with Sheehan showed - - once again - - HRC is not ready for Prime Time.

Here she gives Cindy the courtesy of meeting with her in a no-win situation for her (Hillary), and she gets bashed beyond reason for it. No surprise, considering how so many DU'ers seem to hate Hillary more than the right wing does.

Had she chosen NOT to take Cindy up on her invitation, I can only imagine the fireworks around here. Some people just can't be satisfied no matter what when it comes to Hillary.

I'll bet anything that all the Hillary haters are pissed off that she DID meet with Cindy, period, because now they can't complain about THAT. LOL!!

She's gotta keep feeding cannon fodder into the war so she can capture the "middle" and her presidential ambitions won't "die in vain".

Too bad about the "failed insurgency" she told us about.

sending in more warm bodies to be blown to smithereens. They'll keep going and dying until someone in power has a Vietnam-like epiphany, declares victory and gets out. George Aiken, I wish you were here.

So why don't you try to save another life while you can? Or how about twenty lives? Or thirty? How many more lives need to die? Vietnam hon.

That is a personal, subjective call you cannot make for ANYONE BUT YOURSELF!

Each person has to make that judgement in their own time and own way.

If Hillary can say she doesn't want anyone to die in vain, don't you think the Mother of a fallen soldier has a right to ask her to help stop having people die in vain?

I'm NOT making the calls here... OTHER PEOPLE are and THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT.

"Why is it so hard for people to accept, even those who were lied to in order to get thier support that the soldiers have ALREADY DIED IN VAIN? THEY DIED FOR BUSH'S VANITY!"

You have absolutely no right to force your judgement of the meaning within someone elses death.

Cindy may be entitled to speak about HER son. Has she actually said other children have died in vain, in those words? I don't think so.

If she has, then I disavow her completely.

Cannon fodder for ambitious politicians.

oil and reconstruction profits. By a war profiteer's standards, they didn't die in vain. :eyes: :grr: :puke:

Not to mention the arms makers and casket providers.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

"Vichy Dem"? I googled it but didn't get a definition.

met with her because she asked then didn't like the answer so Cindy just bitches more. Right now Cindy can just go away - she's completely lost her way. If she can't stick with her agenday - the death of her son and holding the bush cartel responsible - then she should just go home and shut up. Many, many people support Cindy as did I - but no more - she's really just looking like an ass and I'm beginning to think she is just that.

and wants to know whether she can get support from Dems- with no pressure from Dems, the war goes on, and more Casey Sheehans happen every day.

This war is Bush's and the neocons fault- aided and abetted by the Dems including Hillary Clinton and John Kerry who refuse to call for an end to the carnage. Too bad.

The DEMS need to get their ACT TOGETHER.

Maybe you should just stop paying attention. No matter what happens she has done more than any 1000 DU'ers put together to stop the war. She will continue to do what she feels is right, whether you understand, like, approve or disapprove doesn't matter. What did you sacrifice for this war? How can you possibly judge her? Your response makes no sense whatsoever. Hillary is beholden to her corporate sponsors, sorry if people around here don't like it, thats the way it is. Cindy is beholden to the memory of her son. If there were 2 lines and Hillary was leading one and Cindy leading the other I'd be in that long ass line.... behind Cindy.

Can't you guys do any better than that? That was a twister if I've ever seen one!

:applause:

" Many, many people support Cindy as did I - but no more - she's really just looking like an ass and I'm beginning to think she is just that."

You sound just like the callers on C-spam: "I USED TO BE a Democrat - but no more!....yada yada yada



:kick::kick::kick:

fucking ass.

I got the feeling she was basically happy with the meeting from the article. Positive even. Did we read the same thing?

Cindy is doing great, as the accidental leader of anti-war movement, although I realize she looks like an "ass" to some - Bill O'Lielly comes to mind, as well as other RW asses. In everything I've read, she has been intelligent and articulate - I've not once seen anything that made her look like an "ass". Why in the world should she go away, when the anti-war movement is FINALLY getting some coverage because of her?

they already did

What a bunch of claptrap.

Why don't ya let some more die in vain then..assbite?

Gack! :eyes:

know :wtf: is going on.

Why Immediate Withdrawal Makes Sense
by Michael Schwartz

1.The U.S. military is already killing more civilian Iraqis than would likely die in any threatened civil war;
2.The U.S. presence is actually aggravating terrorist (Iraqi-on-Iraqi) violence, not suppressing it;
3.Much of the current terrorist violence would be likely to subside if the U.S. left;
4.The longer the U.S. stays, the more likely that scenarios involving an authentic civil war will prove accurate.


http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0922-32.htm

on here!

Dear Mrs (I'm not a missus)XXXXX XXXXXXXX:

"I happen to think that fighting for freedom is a noble cause."

soul?

Is killing Innocent Iraqis a Noble Cause? Is Bombing another Country based on Lies a Noble Cause? Is opening up the Biggest Terrorists' Training CAmp in the World a Noble Cause?

What Freedom? We're Fighting for our Freedoms at home with the Fucking Patriot Acts 1,2,3,4!

omg

To HIllary, show some heart, show some real person, and speak respectfully and honestly to us - can the political advice you're getting. And if you are sincere when you talk about us being in Iraq to "fight for OUR freedom" - I really, really hope you're not our nominee. Because I don't like liars.

Own up to what happened and your role in it and what is going on now.

Thank you,

A concerned subject

She's not the only Dem that needs to come forward and be straight with the American people about how we went to attack and invade and occupy a nation that was no threat to us.

I read the sentence as "fighting for freedom." Maybe she meant freedom for the Iraqi people when she said that.

than it does out of the bushco players.

Its bullshit.

Its a bullshit shiny nameplate for an ocean of lies and blood.

Sorry HIllary can speak to this with integrity, and just tell the damn truth, you know????, or she's going to lose some votes. I swore, to vote for the best chance to get bush out or limit his power, and I promised many that if the Dems didn't level with us after those battles, I might be gone. My vote is not a given.

And I like Hillary.

betrayed way.

CAN she?

exactly as I said Hillary said.

In any case,I guess Cindy can pack up her tent,
now she has the answer to her question.
Not from Bush, you know, but it'll have to do
till then.

This is a flame-war.