So I see the Pink Tutus are going after Cindy......

I guess some things never change.

Smearing all those who don't agree with your blind support just because they can engage in their own independent thought process while using critical thinking skills and objectivity, is pathetic.

Hypocrisy? Blood-thirst?

Her thinking is too black and white and her rhetoric has become over the top. I don't fault her for it, per se, because I know how passionate she is about what she believes in and why. But just because I feel for her and understand why she holds such passion, does not mean I have to align myself with her or agree with everything she does.

I think what she did today was inappropriate and I think she's gone a bit too over the edge. May God bless her and nothing but good happen to her. I just can't support her or her words 100% anymore.

:shrug:

And if the Democratic Party is going along with this war, then it deserves not necessarily to be undermined but to be reminded of its moral obligations, and rudely, if that's what it takes.

Just wondering. What have you done to support Cindy's cause?

black and white.

She was all good when the Democrats needed her to be good, but now they want her to shut up...


Just like politics, use them then lose them....

it appears not to matter how respectfully one disagrees with Sheehan. Not that I particularly mind being demonized by the usual subjects, but when there isn't room for disagreement over tactics, it's a sad day.

For all the postings slaming the right wing "sheep" anyone that DARES to have a different view around this place is attacked.

Go figure huh?

You would think that you damned Cindy to hell.

For the record, I agree with your post about Cindy. I love her, but I don't agree with her today.

Oh, that's a big mistake. And a nasty insult as well.

Cindy Sheehan has put herself out there taking the extreme position on the war. (My position, btw, is OUT NOW.) By doing so, she's giving cover to every Democratic politician in the room. They NEED her to do it, inconvenient as it appears. Because, when they sit down to discuss, or dictate, terms, they will automatically appear to be more reasonable than the "radicals" represented by Sheehan.

These aren't separate, antagonistic processes going on. No, they aren't in collusion. But Pelosi and Reid can't force anything out of Caligula without demonstrable action being taken by SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE that is attention-getting, forceful, and EXTREME. (Although extremism in the US is pretty pink tutu, actually.)

Sheehan has volunteered. Thank her.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

It means supporting her no matter what and casting resentment towards anyone who for any given reason does not support her 100%. It is what I consider completely narrow minded thinking. There is no declaration that we have to support her 100% of the time. Some seem to come off with that mentality, and lord help those who don't agree with them.

I'm sorry, but what she did today was over the top as was her rhetoric. I say God bless her and from the bottom of my heart wish nothing but great things for her, and have no anger or otherwise towards her whatsoever. But please don't cast animosity on those who don't stand behind her 100% anymore.

read my signature line....

No thanks.

And part of my thanks to her is thanking her for reminding this nation that you CAN disagree with someone ... be it the "President" and even ... GASP ... people of your own politcal views and not have to suffer for it.

It seems that many people on DU forget that.

I love Cindy Sheehan. But I don't have to agree with her 100%.

with dismissiveness.

I suppose Cindy created a host of mass graves, too.

Is it really that challenging for you to accept that not everyone will agree with somebody 100% of the time, and that some will have their own independent opinions that might not align with yours? If so, I'm sorry to hear that.

That's what you meant, right?

you've been watching Dirty Harry, haven't you?

"a legend in his own mind.........."

what a crime it is to have a mind that operates with such low frequency.

I did... and I must say it's a pleasure to know that a stalker has been eliminated.

You might want to check out another website, that one that's often derided on DU. They practice and promote group think there so you might like it. This is the Democratic Underground, so that means we are each allowed our own opinion.

I think she has crossed the line from being a greiving mother to being a glory-seeking self-martyr.

I think that she was lucky that the democrats she interrupted yesterday didn't have her arrested and thrown into jail.

I'm putting her in the Dr. Kervorkian category-he continued to push the line and ended up serving a stiff sentence when he got caught up in his own game and lost sight of what he was actually trying to accomplish in the first place. Dr. K crossed the line from assisted suicide, which had the support of the people, to euthanasia, and then had the audacity to tape the act and let "60 Minutes" broadcast it.

Cindy's issue is obviously different and has different potential endings, but still, she is risking losing any public sympathy she has left.

I think it's arrogant to stand there like she did, before the congress even started, and make demands as if she speaks for the american people as a whole. No, she doesn't, and she certainly doesn't speak for me. It's that kind of thinking that will cost her in the long run.

please explain.

all things pink and feminine being weak and undesirable. Gender-based insult - the opposite of "having balls."

BARTCOP uses it to link things that are pink and feminine with being weak and undesirable. Gender-based insult - the opposite of "having balls."

how depicting politicians in pink dresses ISN'T intended to insult them by feminizing them.

If you depicted them in clothing that only men would wear, would it still read as an insult to you?

I'm just sayin'!

:shrug:

She has to be more careful not to keep getting arrested.

Redstone

same thought, same time. :)

Redstone

Sometimes you lose your freedom voluntarily by "behaving" so you don't go to jail.

I don't see Cindy as someone who's willing to lose her freedom in that manner.

Redstone

If UPJr were killed in this bushwar, I'd be risking all also. As it is, we stand with her and thank her.

the irrisponsible behavior of this congress. I wish that those words were turned around on those responsible for so many murders. Truely it is those persons,who legislate funding for this war, who should be more careful. Cindy is doing what the founding fathers hope all of us continue to have the strenghth to do. Stand up.

she knows what the core of her being (and the rest of many of us here in america are clamoring for):

NO MORE OCCUPATION OF IRAQ.

BRING THE SOLDIERS HOME.

STOP THE BUSH LIES.

STOP THE MONEY WHICH SUPPORT THE BUSH LIES.

RETURN OUR GOVERNMENT TO ITS DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES.

CEASE THE BUSH DICTATORSHIP.

LET AMERICA BE AMERICA.


i applaud cindy sheehan.

It's oddly, well, almost coordinated how it pops up now and again.

I save this stuff when it does. I'm finding a lot of common names -- or nicknames I guess -- a lot of common themes, and a hell of a lot of common verbiage. The only difference I'm finding is the insertion of new quotes and the *claim* that all of this is new thinking.

It's still boring.

Didn't fit him either.

so back then, it fit perfectly.

She's undermining our party and making us look bad. I don't know what will happen this november.

:sarcasm:

and I'd probably support her if she did.

But by shouting down our elected Democratic representatives today, as they were trying to communicate with us on the eve of their taking power, she effectively disenfranchised all those who worked so hard and so long to recapture the Congress after twelve, long years in the wilderness.

I know what Cindy's message is, and I appreciate it.

Today, however, I wanted to hear from our elected Democrats about their reforms and Cindy decided for me that I shouldn't be able to hear them.

I am not in agreement with her deciding that for me.

I thought they might have been picking on me but after reading their smears of 1 of the biggest dem activists in the country today, I don't feel bad at all. In fact, I feel really good about being in the same company.

Then I am proud to be one, because I will not agree she is right to outyell our Democrats at a press conference.

She has many other ways to hold feet to the fire.

I have no problem with those who disagree with some of the things she does... but when they go overboard, well....

Guess the rules have changed now.

She met with many Democrats, some who supported the war, some who did not. She made public on a website many things that should have been kept private, since they met with her privately.

Why, and maybe you can answer this, was the only one she gave a good mark to John Kerry? Yet she really went after others, and it was sort of unkind. What did he say about the war a year ago that impressed her so much?

I like him, but I could not figure why she was so excited about it.

He has certainly spoken about against it a whole lot lately, taking the lead on it. But what happened last year?

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

Sounds like you've been prancing around in those ruby slippers a little bit too long, pretending to be Dorothy. Maybe you should tap them together and hope for an end to the "war" instead of making little Wizard of Oz references.

That might hurt. :rofl:

Wonks are what brought down the Republicans.

*gasp*

To borrow an expression from the OP..."some thing never change"

and still thriving here in the DU. x(

:sarcasm:

Stupid thread. :eyes:

when Cindy et al confronted them. They ran away. And their apologists at DU came to their defense.

Some of the things I've read remind me of the fact that closed minds, like closed rooms, are often stuffy.

Wooosh!!

:shrug:

Is there some explanation?

its referring to the Dem's that went along with Chimpys agenda

Hillary the enabler.

but the Pink Tutu reference on Dems who cave into the Repubs is dead on the mark.