I understand why Cindy Sheehan did what she did yesterday

I read my emails after reading about her action here on DU yesterday afternoon. In a nutshell, what happened is that too many Dem reps accepted help from the peace community in the November elections. And since the election, some of those reps have decided NOT to work at ending the war in Iraq. I had several emails from various groups (not just Cindy's groups) reporting various legislators have changed their mind about Iraq and asking peace activists to contact certain legislators reminding them of their campaign promises to end the war.

I know that the vast majority of the people in the peace groups I work with were also very active on at least one campaign. We made up a good portion of the worker bees. So the candidates who are now going back on what they promised should not be surprised that the peace community is reminding them of what our #1 issue is. They admired our passion when we helped them get elected; this action yesterday should not have come as a shock to them. And the reps who have gone back on their word are going to have to justify that as well. I honestly believe that had that not happened, the Dems news conference yesterday would not have been disrupted.

I also think the talk of cooperating with the republicans is upsetting to many peace activists, (as well as a lot of DUers, based on what I have read here). Here is a quote from Cindy I found in an article about yesterday's events:

"We didn't put you in power to work with the people that have been murdering hundreds of thousands of people since they have been in power"

Now does this mean I agree with what Cindy did yesterday? No. But I do understand WHY.

About Iraq? Thanks.

is the main one in most of the emails I got.

About Wasserman Schultz?

What is her stance now?

It said she had changed her stance about withdrawing from Iraq and asked all the recipients to contact her.

last SOTU address?

:shrug:

I can't say i disagree with what she was trying to do but she didn't do it to Republicans.

THAT BOTHERS ME.

Thank you for the update.

As long as the Dems are just a little less evil then the pukes they replace, then we win. This is all we can expect.

I hope all is well with you and your family.

Peace and low stress.

God Bless the Peacemakers!

Only because the republicans would have stopped her at the door. She wasn't given the chance.

I've got no problem with insisting that our representatives be held to account, whichever party they belong to.

shut it down. Doesn't seem fair.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x11608

And there's threads all over DU, pro- and con-.

and it should happen every single day to the Democrats until we are out of Iraq.

The republicans would not allow a group of peace activists anywhere near their press conferences.

Doesn't seem fair.

They made promises to the peace activists then allowed them into the press conference in what I assume is a hope that the peace activists can be used as props (where they are not gonna talk about ending the war but increasing minimum wage and passing ethic laws).

Its like when Bill Clinton used the gay community to say change is coming then he passed dont ask dont tell and DOMA in the 90s.

The lesson learned is if you are gonna recruit a sect of your party, then hold true to your promises.

and a great analogy.

Thanks.

Was this her first attempt at getting the Dems attention? If so, perhaps it's out of habit, or because she's used to being turned down, but she should know you catch more flies with honey. It's a new Congress, so perhaps it's time for a change in tactics?

I know where she's coming from, and I know her actions are based on her horrible loss in addition her courage when it comes to standing up and speaking truth to power, but, the reality is, she at least tried to meet with the Repubs before they turned her away.

Giving the Dems the opportunity to hear her out in a more refined setting would have sent a much stronger message about the Dems taking the time to listen (and if they didn't, well that's an even bigger story), and it would have provided her with much better Photo-Ops to get her message out.

My .02. Flame away.

It's up to the party

I agree. I think it went swimmingly. I hope to see much, much more of this. I hope something similar happens today, and every day until this ends.

I was just trying to explain WHY I believe they disrupted the press conference yesterday. I was trying to keep my opinion about the action out of what I wrote. I didn't think that was important. Sorry if I was not clear enough.

:hi:

That was the meaning of her actions. The silent are ignored.

:hi:

I think people tend to forget that WE ARE THE BOSS. If the elected officials tell us one thing but do another WE THE BOSSES need to say WHOA THERE!

And I think the timing was perfect--right before swearing in these guys were reminded the war has not gone away.

WHY?
What kind of ethics is that?

you will see he is very pro-war.

Lock the peace activist out! Then Rahm could rant about how great the new bankruptcy law is and how the Dems aren't as bad as the alternative.