Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Cindy Sheehan
Posted by: Jon Henke on Friday, August 12, 2005

I've been hesitant to address a mother's personal grief and her desire to speak up about it, but Cindy Sheehan has been the talk of the blogosphere for a bit now. The NYTimes and The Independent have addressed it...
Cindy Sheehan, 48, has set up camp some five miles from Mr Bush's Prairie Chapel ranch, demanding that the President meet her. By last night some 100 people had travelled to join her, pitching tents by the roadside and placing small white crosses in the grass to remember American soldiers who have died in the war.

Ms Sheehan, whose 24-year-old son Casey was killed in Iraq last year, has vowed to stay the duration of Mr Bush's holiday, but the President gave no indication yesterday that he would meet her request.
My heart goes out to this mother. I have no idea what it must be like to lose a child, but it's a tragedy I don't even want to imagine. I don't begrudge her campaign in Crawford in the least.

Whatever the tragic backstory behind her campaign, her right to her opinion is indisputable; her right to speak it is Constitionally protected; her right to stand outside of President Bush's ranch is inviolate.

Did she change her story, or has the Right misrepresented her statements? You know, it doesn't really matter that much. She's a grieving, angry, searching Mother of a soldier who gave his life for his country. Frankly, she needs neither your approval, nor your support.

As Maureen Dowd wrote, "the moral authority of parents who bury children killed in Iraq is absolute". Of course, as Maureen Dowd didn't write, parents who have buried children killed in Iraq also frequently continue to support the war. Their moral authority to speak out on the war is every bit as absolute.

All of that, however, misses an important point. As much sympathy as I do have for Cindy Sheehan, it still remains that US foreign policy and military strategy is set by Constitutionally elected/appointed officials, not grieving mothers. Her loss—while it may give those officials insight into the costs of their foreign policy and military strategy—gives her no special insight into those policies and strategies.

Nor should the President entertain every grieving mother or agitated activist demanding an audience with the President. Imagine the downward spiral that would create, with every activist group in the country camping on the White House/Crawford lawn until 2009, at which point they'd be replaced by different activists camping on the White House/(somewhere else) lawns.

Ultimately, it's a tragedy that Casey Sheehan died; it's a shame that the President can't meet with Cindy Sheehan without provoking a political PR fight, and a downward spiral of activists demanding audience; but mostly, it's terribly sad that Cindy Sheehan's grief has been turned into a political opportunity for both Republicans and Democrats to take shots at each other.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
Of COURSE it matters if she’s changed her tune.
You know full wel;l that were a Democrat in the WH, the press would be all over her wanting to know about her connections with various political groups, with particular scrutiny of her financial transactions.

IE; They’d be looking at... did she get paid to change her tune.

Her son apparently thought what he was doing was the correct thing to be doing. I’m not prepared to debate his wisdom here.

Put another way; I’m not prepared to call her son a dummy. She, apparently, is. And my sympathy for her loss disappears when she crosses that line.

 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitheads.blogspot.com
I should also say it disappears further when she is so obviously taking cues from animals who were loudly calling her son a murderer just for being in Iraq in uniform.
 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitheads.blogspot.com
She’s a grieving, angry, searching Mother of a soldier who gave his life for his country. Frankly, she needs neither your approval, nor your support

BOLLOCKS.

She’s a pawn of Michael Moore and the MoveOn crowd who at the most charitable, deserves our pity for being such a deranged pathetic creature.

She sees no problem honoring her son’s death by aligning with those who would call him baby-killer and spit in his face while he lived.

Hey, it’s her son, she can "honor" his passing in any way she wishes.

But once she put this on a political level, she’s put herself out there for "our approval (or disapproval) and support (or opposition)

She doesn’t give shit 1 about her son. His death is just another gimmick in her moonbat bag of tricks to protest the war. This woman was off the reservation long before her son died. Like most antiwar protestors, no death is too small for her to exploit.

This is not a grieving mother becoming unhinged with sadness and loss.

This is either a pathetic woman in need of help being manipulated by despicable people, or a cold blooded political attack.

Either way, it’s an obscenity


 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
"This is not a grieving mother becoming unhinged with sadness and loss." No, she’s a mom who finally crossed the line, leaving Dubya’s folly behind.
 
Written By: Bill Costley
URL: http://www,billcostley.blog-city.com
No, she’s a mom who finally crossed the line, leaving Dubya’s folly behind.

She’s more of a willing participant in a game of political football, with her cast as the football.

That may be fine for those who hate Bush, but I feel sorry for her family. Grief is one thing, exploiting your son’s death is another.

She met with Bush in Ft. Lewis. This isn’t about any lingering questions. This is simply a politcal event of her own contrivance.

I’m sorry, my sympathy for her loss has its limits, and she passed those limits with this little stunt.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Part of me utterly disagrees w/ shark’s comment. To presume that the mother is doing this out of anything other than grief is horrific and off-putting.

But notice the reaction that greeted Michael Berg, the father of Nick Berg, one of the early civilian victims of the insurgents/terrorists in Iraq. Folks were fully prepared to condemn Michael Berg’s participation in Moveon.org rallies, even as they recognized that he had a right to grieve for his son’s loss in any manner he wished.

So, is Cindy Sheehan less of a political player than Michael Berg? Or is there a feeling that a mother would not exploit her child’s death, but a father might? Or is it the apparent reversal in position, such that Michael Berg, who had long opposed the Bush Administration, was simply "carrying on," while Cindy Sheehan (who seems to have done the same), having met w/ the President in a civil manner, is now protesting loudly?

Conversely, who remembers Herbert Shughart? The father of one of the recipients of the Medal of Honor refused to shake hands with Bill Clinton, and accused him of being unfit for command. Somehow, that seemed to be a tempest in a teapot, and merited little coverage at the time, and none afterwards. Certainly, not the media circus attending Ms. Sheehan at this time.


In the end, Ms. Sheehan is entitled, as a parent who’s lost a child, to respond as she sees fit. Laugh, cry, be bitter, be resigned. Blame the President, blame Raytheon, blame capitalism, blame Islam, blame the terrorists, blame Iraqis in general. But we do not have to pay her attention. And we certainly do not have to pay attention to those who would leech and sup on this woman’s pain.
 
Written By: Lurking Observer
URL: http://
What is the noble cause for which my son died?"

Why not buy her a ticket to Iraq, lulu, and let her ask an Iraqi kid?

I mean, if she can’t figure it out and all ...

Talk about clueless.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
"What is the noble cause for which my son died?"

Maybe this post from Iraq the Model is a start.

 
Written By: Rob A.
URL: finewhyfine.typepad.com
Cindy Sheehan should be ashamed of her actions. he son was not forced to go to Iraq he volunteered to go, this is an all volunteer military. He went and served his country and we should all be proud of what he did. I know all of us in the military are. What she is doing is spitting on her sons memory and all he stood for and did. President Bush should not even think of speaking to her. What if the President was to meet with every person who lost a family member durring WWII thats all he would have been doing. Look at all those killed in Korea and veitnam. Only an idiot would expect the president to meet with her. She should be proud of the job were doing. We lost 5,000 soliders on D-Day. We have only lost 1,800 in Iraq. That is out standing. I don’t understand the media, we are winning hands down in all areas. So kick Cindy Sheehan of the news and out of the country.
 
Written By: SFC Daniel T. Speer
URL: http://
There is much MORE to this than just the death of Cindy Sheehan’s son. This is about corruption and lies. Cindy, I back you all the way. Don’t let the bastards grind you down!

I do not live in the US or I would be there in Crawford, TX. People, unplug your televisions and get down to help her. Or do you LIKE the fact the US is a police state??

Let the Revolution begin!!

 
Written By: Tiggy
URL: http://
Why not buy her a ticket to Iraq, lulu, and let her ask an Iraqi kid?

I mean, if she can’t figure it out and all ...

Talk about clueless.
And ask the kid what? Is the kid glad Saddam is gone and that the US is there to set up a "democracy"? My guess is that the kid will say: "What the f*** are you talking about? I don’t give a rat’s ass about any of that stuff. What I care about is not walking out the street and getting kidnapped or, worse yet, shot. And I am worried about the same thing happening to my parents. My number one goal right now is survival. And while Saddam was evil and I was scared of him, at least as a kid I didn’t have to worry that when I walked out the door, I wouldn’t be coming home that night. Now I do."

 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
Put another way; I’m not prepared to call her son a dummy. She, apparently, is.
She doesn’t give shit 1 about her son. His death is just another gimmick in her moonbat bag of tricks to protest the war. This woman was off the reservation long before her son died. Like most antiwar protestors, no death is too small for her to exploit.
So kick Cindy Sheehan of the news and out of the country
Let’s stop and take a breath. My understanding is that we are in Iraq fighting for democracy, civil rights, and the rule of law. That Ms. Sheehan can sit outside the president’s house and protest is a great example of what freedom and civil rights actually mean. And so she exercises her rights - her freedom.

And when she does this, which is what we are fighting for, what we are fighting to give the Iraqis the chance to do, we get comments like this from the right. The last one is the best: "Hey, Cindy, if you are so damm interested in exercising your right to free speech, why don’t you just leave and go to one of those countries where they care about free speech. Cuz this ain’t one of ’em."



 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
The noble cause we are fighting for is promoting democracy. I expect that is the answer W would give if he actually spoke to her. The problem is that can’t be the real answer, because if we were fighting to establish a democracy, we would have sent in hundred of thousands of ground troops to secure the peace right away, like General Shinseki said we should. Or we wouldn’t have gone in at all.

That’s what bothers most Americans. Most Americans are of the persuasion that you either do it the right way, or you don’t do it at all. And it is finally dawning on many Americans that we aren’t doing it the right way. And as a result, Americans are getting killed.

I think for most Americans, it’s not the lies, or the deception, or the propaganda. For most Americans, it’s an issue of practicality. They don’t believe Bush deliberately lied to get us into war. But they do believe that he screwed up after we went in by failing to deal with the aftermath. And now he can’t admit it. And that is why Sheehan has caught the nation’s attention: she symbolizes American’s frustration with this war and Bush’s unwillingness to admit to making mistakes. She wants some time to ask questions we would all like to ask.
 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
Frankly, she needs neither your approval, nor your support.

That’s certainly convenient for she shall receive neither.

 
Written By: Mark A. Flacy
URL: http://
MK looks into his crystal ball and says...
My guess is that the kid will say: "What the f*** are you talking about? I don’t give a rat’s ass about any of that stuff. What I care about is not walking out the street and getting kidnapped or, worse yet, shot. And I am worried about the same thing happening to my parents. My number one goal right now is survival. And while Saddam was evil and I was scared of him, at least as a kid I didn’t have to worry that when I walked out the door, I wouldn’t be coming home that night. Now I do."

Ah, yes, as long as there is order everything will be just fine.

I can’t wait to implement that idea here, with the added spicy touch of knowing that MK would agree.

 
Written By: Mark A. Flacy
URL: http://
That Ms. Sheehan can sit outside the president’s house and protest is a great example of what freedom and civil rights actually mean. And so she exercises her rights - her freedom.

And we have the same rights to protest her actions. And you have a right to whine about it. So?

 
Written By: Mark A. Flacy
URL: http://
The noble cause we are fighting for is promoting democracy. I expect that is the answer W would give if he actually spoke to her. The problem is that can’t be the real answer, because if we were fighting to establish a democracy, we would have sent in hundred of thousands of ground troops to secure the peace right away, like General Shinseki said we should. Or we wouldn’t have gone in at all.

MK, would you please stop proving that you don’t know shit about military operations or military history for that matter?

 
Written By: Mark A. Flacy
URL: http://
Let me be clear. No one has more right to express their views and receive support, from wherever it comes from, for their efforts than those who have suffered the loss of a child that they reared and/or bore in a time of war.

Secondly, you all who seem to focus on her changing her tune didn’t call President Bush on the carpet for changing his most recent tune - from firing anyone involved with the disclosure of the CIA operative to someone who broke the law.

Ms. Sheehan, in my opinion, has exposed the Limbaugh’s, Hannity’s and O’Reily’s for what they are ... puppets of the Republican Party. Those who are conservative and share many of the views of these puppets should tell them, the puppets, they have crossed the line.

Why?

Because we are at war with terrorist. And the more divided we become the more of my and your great grandchildren (yet to be born -some of you will get this... the others need to read some philosophy...) will die because we are not united. My President, I know that many people don’t feel that way but if you believe in freedom - we have no choice to accept that, has acted in a manner that fails to take into consideration the importance of unity of the American People. He fails to see that victory in this war will come at a heavier cost if he does not make every effort to achieve consensus. He seems to operate with the arrogance of a dictator. Those of you who voted for him should think about the future. Would that future be more secure if our leader listened to opposing views and made efforts to take a course of action that brings most of America with him. It is you who voted for George Bush who has a responsibility to your fellow American to understand that preponderance of evidence that President Bush lied ... mislead and tries to destroy, via character assassination against, anyone who does not embrace his view hook line and sinker. It is you who must hear Ms. Sheehan’s pain and tell President Bush not worry about the polls ...That above all else he has a duty to answer to the American People. It is you, the Americans who support him, that need to make him understand that he, President Bush, is nothing in relation to unity of this Nation must have to destroy our enemies.

 
Written By: Juan Garza
URL: http://
I’m losing patience here. I try to put up a post defending a grieving mother’s right to—correct or incorrect—speak out about her son, even to criticize the President with the moral standing that comes with having made the ultimate sacrifice (and it is...any parent will tell you they’d far rather die than lose their child); I try to put up a post pointing out that, despite her tragedy and her right to speak, she’s acquired no special right to influence policy, have access to the President, etc.

And you people go and fill the comments up with dumbassery. Bear with me as I lose my temper.
You know full wel;l that were a Democrat in the WH, the press would be all over her wanting to know about her connections with various political groups, with particular scrutiny of her financial transactions.
You appear incapable of making any decisions without first consulting the Democratic Party. I, on the other hand, make my own judgements.
I should also say it disappears further when she is so obviously taking cues from animals who were loudly calling her son a murderer just for being in Iraq in uniform.
You know what? I don’t agree with you, but even if she is...she has the moral right to do so. And next to her, you have the moral right to shut the fuck up and thank her for her sacrifice.
She doesn’t give shit 1 about her son. His death is just another gimmick in her moonbat bag of tricks to protest the war. This woman was off the reservation long before her son died. Like most antiwar protestors, no death is too small for her to exploit.
That’s just about the sickest, most disgusting thing I think I’ve read in a month.
BTW, the only question she wants answered is, "What is the noble cause for which my son died?" That’s all. Bush won’t answer it because he doesn’t have an answer.
Actually, it’s been answered time and time again. If you don’t know the answer, it’s your own damned fault for not paying the least bit of attention.
And conservative pundits and right-wingers can smear Cindy Sheehan or try to change the subject or argue semantics over content or question her motives or parrot conservative talking points – it’s all irrelevant.
You write this at the bottom of a post about her right to say all that.
But hey, THANKS for all the publicity! It truly is a gift. Really, thank you!
A soldier dies, a mother grieves, you get a publicity event. Charming.
Or do you LIKE the fact the US is a police state??
Cindy Sheehan is protesting, unmolested, outside the President’s own home with police protection. That’s some mighty friendly Police State we have here.
My guess is that the kid will say: "What the f*** are you talking about? I don’t give a rat’s ass about any of that stuff. What I care about is not walking out the street and getting kidnapped or, worse yet, shot. And I am worried about the same thing happening to my parents. My number one goal right now is survival. And while Saddam was evil and I was scared of him, at least as a kid I didn’t have to worry that when I walked out the door, I wouldn’t be coming home that night. Now I do."
As usual, you’re wrong. Polls indicates that Iraqi’s believe they are better off and that they believe (strongly) that they will continue to be better off.
The fact remains that this administration has changed the "reason we went to war" time and again.
Well, no. The fact remains that there were a variety of reasons for the war from the very start. Every Presidential speech before the war contained a few reasons, and even the Congressional Authorization for War contained quite a few of the arguments for war. I’d provide the link, but I’ll just assume that you’re barely literate enough to do a google search for some of the words I just wrote. Try "whitehouse.gov".

It might be useless, though. If you’re just too fucking stupid to know that anyway, you’re probably going to have problems reading for comprehension. In any event, that’s hardly the fault of the pro Iraq war crowd.
Saddam Hussein had no connection with Osama bin Laden. Suddam Hussein did NOT attack this country.
No fucking kidding. Nobody here ever even remotely suggested such a thing.
My President ... has acted in a manner that fails to take into consideration the importance of unity of the American People. He fails to see that victory in this war will come at a heavier cost if he does not make every effort to achieve consensus. He seems to operate with the arrogance of a dictator.
You know, I hear that same bullshit from every single opposition party. And it always means: "the President is doing what he thinks is best, instead of doing what WE think is best! How dare he divide our country by forcing us to disagree with him, compare him to Hitler, etc".

It was bullshit when the GOP did it. It’s bullshit now.
 
Written By: Jon Henke
URL: http://www.QandO.net

And next to her, you have the moral right to shut the fuck up and thank her for her sacrifice.
It wasn’t her sacrafice. It was her son’s.

I’d rather just ignore Cindy Sheehan’s protest and not give her the attention she’s seeking.
 
Written By: h0mi
URL: http://
She lost a son, nimrod.
 
Written By: Jon Henke
URL: http://www.QandO.net
She lost a son, nimrod.

But she gained great political tool.

That’s just about the sickest, most disgusting thing I think I’ve read in a month

You know what I think is the sickest most disgusting thing I have read in a month? A mother so intent to "honor" her son’s death that she:

1) Willingly takes up with a "man" who has lionized the people who killed her son, calling them minutemen and freedom fighters.
2) Willingly takes up with organizations that openly support the people who killed her son
3) Willingly takes up with groups that disrespect her son’s profession, disdain their mission, and generally seek to smear the troops in anyway possible.

I agree, that is pretty sick.

And next to her, you have the moral right to shut the fuck up and thank her for her sacrifice

And next to her, I moral right to call her a load of shit if that’s what I deem.

She wants to put this in the public sphere, then yes, I can judge, comment etc. You’re falling into the trap they want you to fall into Jon. One reason we lost Vietnam is because we lost the homefront. And that’s exactly what they’re trying to do here. And you fall for it.

Yeah, something is disgusting here, but it’s not quite what you think it is...
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Suddam Hussein did NOT attack this country.
Yeah...what did Saddam ever do to America?

Assassination attempt on former US president

Oh. Yeah, yeah. He did do that that. Uh, that’s true. But besides trying to kill a president, how did he ever attack this country?

Attacks on US and allied aircraft in no-fly zones for a decade

Well, yeah. Obviously the anti-aircraft attacks. I mean, the anti-aircraft goes without saying, doesn’t it? But apart from the assassination attempt and the anti-aircraft...

Saddam pays terrorists to kill (shall I post a list of the Americans killed by Palestinian suicide bombers?)

All right, but apart from the assassination attempt, the anti-aircraft attacks, and the terrorist funding of suicide bombers, what has Saddam ever done to us?

/ Monty Python

 
Written By: JWG
URL: http://www.qando.net
McQ. you are an idiot and don’t deserve my time.

And you, lulu, are a total ditz. Apparently you (and Sheehan) can’t figure out the "noble cause" involved here. Is your hatred of Bush that great?

She’s met with the President. He’s talked to her about her son. As mentioned, this isn’t about her son anymore. This is politics ... and Kennedy and Kerry joining the chorus only put an exclamation point to it.

Apparently any spectacle, no matter how unseemly, is perfectly fine with you as long as it carries some chance of embarrasing Bush. What a miserable life you must lead.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://qando.net
She lost a son, nimrod.
A lot of others have too. But her reaction was, shall we say... sigularly bad... at least, it was once MoveOn got ahold of her.

 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitheads.blogspot.com

She lost a son, nimrod.
I am sorry for her loss but I’m not going to thank her for a sacrifice she didn’t make; those thanks are reserved for her son. And her loss doesn’t mean I must "shut the fuck up" instead of critisizing her bigoted anti-Israel stance or her other actions to date.

 
Written By: h0mi
URL: http://
Hello

This must be a conservative blog. I’ll admit right up front that I’m a liberal or whatever you want to call me. For all of those who attack Cindy Sheehan when you get right down to it she personally really hasn’t done anything except serve as a lightning rod for an obvious larger question that relates to polarization that started with the election of 2000 and further deepened with the election of 2004. I don’t believe I remember any part of our constitution that relates to the blind obedient following of any president Republican or Democrat for the next four years. So Ms Sheehan and the rest of us 50 million libs as you call us are simply exercising our constitutional right to disagree. It has been 1 week ago today that Ms Sheehan started her vigil. Why has she stirred up so much anger and vicious hatred expressed on this site and others. I also would ask a larger question and that is why do you people hate us libs so much? Lets face it for 17 of the last 25 years your party has had control of this country so what have we done to make you so angry? What rights do we have? Are we just supposed to blindly follow your president? Can a woman who doesn’t agree with your president stage a peaceful NON-violent protest? Should she be drug away and shot? The Impeachment process
put into the Constitution which I assume all of you people still support has been used twice in recent history once for Bill Clinton and once for Richard Nixon. Nixon’s high crimes were for lying about a breakin at the Democratic National Headquarters. Clinton’s high crimes were for lying about a blowjob in the White House. Neither were convicted. I would guess that most of us 50 million libs will support calls for your presidents impeachment. Why would we do this? Because we believe your President lied about the reasons for going to War with Iraq. If George Bush had told the truth that his reason for going to War with Iraq was to get control of the oil, then we couldn’t say he was lying. So no impeachment from us just some grousing because we probably wouldn’t agree with it. But he lied about the reason and as pointed out from above examples lying is obviosly an impeachable offense. So Ms Sheehan’s stand will serve as an opening shot in the War on Bush which will daily be played out in the media, blogishere,etc. that we 50 million libs will wage until George Bush and his cronies are out of office. Be warned people the battle has just begun.
 
Written By: keyman12
URL: http://
"Did she change her story, or has the Right misrepresented her statements?"



As usual the Media Matters post linked to by Jon misrepresents presents a straw man argument. Neither Drudge nor Patterico (in the linked post) claimed that Sheehan had changed her position on the war. Instead they pointed out that she had changed her characterization of her meeting with the President. Read Drudge’s post again, it doesn’t say anything about Sheehan’s position on the war. The first sentence of his post says "The mother of a fallen U.S. soldier who is holding a roadside peace vigil near President Bush’s ranch—has dramatically changed her account about what happened when she met the commander-in-chief last summer!"
mhttp://www.drudgereportarchives.com/data/2005/08/08/20050808_141400_flash4.htm What part of that can people not understand. Bush met with her and her family and she praised the meeting and his behavior. All the supposed debunking of criticism against Sheehan cites her positions on the war and that has nothing to do with Drudge’s post and the supposed misrepresentation by conservatives.



Notwithstanding Jon’s admonition that Sheehan critics "have the moral right to shut the fuck up and thank her for her sacrifice", we all have the right to scrutinize Sheehan’s statements and disagree with her if we wish. Exercising our right to criticize her is one of the things that her son, who is a bona fide hero, was fought and died to protect. Suffering that loss shouldn’t innoculate her from scrutiny now that she has voluntarily entered the political fray. I think that this post makes the case very effectively and everyone should read it http://varifrank.com/archives/2005/08/the_call.php

Even though Sheehan has suffered an unimaginable loss, she is still a liberal moonbat. The only people trying to stifle debate are liberals who make the lame argument that because Casey Sheehan was a hero, you can’t respond critically to anything his moonbat mother says.

Here are some of Cindy Sheehan’s greatest hits (so to speak).

- [from the Varifrank post linked to above]“We need to get our troops out of Iraq. The only reason Bush wants to stay there is because his buddies are getting rich and feasting off the blood of our children”

- [from her recent appearance at San Francisco State University where she appeared on the same bill with terrorist abetting lawyer and convicted felon, Lynne Stewart. http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=17915

"Sheehan said she considered Lynne Stewart her Atticus Finch, the lawyer who defended an innocent Black man accused of rape in the book and film ’To Kill A Mockingbird.’"

- "We have no Constitution. We’re the only country with no checks and balances. We want our country back if we have to impeach George Bush down to the person who picks up the dog sh-t in Washington! Let George Bush send his two little party animals to die in Iraq."

Sorry. We all have the right to respond to this nonsense no matter who she is.
 
Written By: jt007
URL: http://
"One reason we lost Vietnam is because we lost the homefront."

Wow. Like we had any business being in Vietnam in the first place. Have you talked to ’nam vet lately? Ever visited a VA hospital?

Cindy Sheehan is doing the right thing.

As I see it, Bush has the same problems with Cindy Sheehan as the other right wingers posting here: the moral consequences of facing the fact, or even the possibility, that they might be just plain wrong are too much to take.

It’s a lot safer (and comfortable) to watch Fox news and be angry at Cindy Sheehan than deal with the truth. It’s a lot more comfortable to clutch at the straws of justification that Hussein was up to something bad than to face the horrid blackness of responsibility for the unnecessary deaths of Americans and Iraqis.

Our responsibility: Right wingers *and* left wingers.

Most of my trips into the right wing blogosphere just leave me shaking my head. Unwillingness to face facts. Vitriolic attacks. A hollywood sense of honor, like life is some kind of John Wayne movie.

But it’s all the same: running from that practical voice in your head that says "this is wrong".
 
Written By: Commento
URL: http://
Babble on. JWG, you have really outdone everyone here. Nobody, including me, thinks that Saddam Hussein was or is a great guy. We are well aware of the atrocities he has committed.
Did you even read what I wrote? Where did I say ANYTHING about Saddam’s atrocities in Iraq?

You claimed that he did NOT attack OUR country. I showed you were wrong. You obviously can’t read what YOU write.

 
Written By: JWG
URL: http://www.qando.net
Like we had any business being in Vietnam in the first place. Have you talked to ’nam vet lately?
My father was and is proud of his role (three combat tours) in fighting the communists in Vietnam. The atrocities committed after we left demonstrate that our goal of resisting the spread of communism was noble.
the moral consequences of facing the fact, or even the possibility, that they might be just plain wrong
Commento, the authors of the QandO blog have stated they have nothing against Sheehan wanting Bush to face the horrible consequences of war. The obvious problem is that she ALREADY met with Bush. So her demand to face Bush and ask why her son was sent to Iraq is disingenuous. That’s the criticism.
 
Written By: JWG
URL: http://www.qando.net

She lost a son, nimrod.
I am sorry for her loss but I’m not going to thank her for a sacrifice she didn’t make; those thanks are reserved for her son. And her loss doesn’t mean I must "shut the fuck up" instead of critisizing her bigoted anti-Israel stance or her other actions to date.
Wrong angle.

sac·ri·fice
n.


1.
1. The act of offering something to a deity in propitiation or homage, especially the ritual slaughter of an animal or a person.
2. A victim offered in this way.
2.
1. Forfeiture of something highly valued for the sake of one considered to have a greater value or claim.


A sacrafice, by definition, is an offering given willingy, and freely.

Clearly, by her changed reaction, what Sheehan did, became nothing of the sort. Was this a willing gift, thanking her would be needful. The current situation, however, is that there is only one person to thank; Her son.

And, thinking on it, her son particularly is deserving of thanks... Think; It’s not often that a son, growing up under such a mother will be mature enough to make such a choice. A rare one, this, and worthy of an added level of respect, I think.
 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitheads.blogspot.com
I have developed a new website that is opposed to Cindy Sheehan as well as her supporters.

I developed this site to see how many people are supporting the war in Iraq as well as the President.

I invite all who read this to check it out and tell your friends. Who knows it could be a hit. If it is a hit we will have a good idea how many people are standing by our country and it’s ongoing work in Iraq!

 
Written By: webmaster
URL: http://www.stopcindysheehan.org
Jon Henke:

"As Maureen Dowd wrote, "the moral authority of parents who bury children killed in Iraq is absolute""

By your and Ms. Dowd’s logic, then, that ZOG manipulated the United States into invading Iraq is a moral absolute.

That the United States is only acted to shield the Zionist Entity from Iraq and Iran is a moral absolute.

That the Jewish State must be destroyed is a moral absolute.

Ah, yes, the old Blood Libel—Whatever happens, BLAME! THE! JEWS!. What this Sheehan woman has become is repulsive. So much so that her husband—Casey’s father—has left her. That she hides behind the memory of her fallen son to spew her bile is obscene. That our blog host encourages her further descent into madness is tragic.

YOU STF up, Henke.

—furious
 
Written By: furious_a
URL: http://www.shanksvillememorial.com
By your and Ms. Dowd’s logic, then, that ZOG manipulated the United States into invading Iraq is a moral absolute.
I didn’t write or imply that their moral authority made them correct, you ninny. It simply gives them the moral authority that comes with having sacrificed.

She does have the moral authority. And, as I wrote and you completely missed, so do the other parents who lost children.

That moral authority, however, doesn’t make them correct. A point which seems to have completely passed you by.
 
Written By: Jon Henke
URL: http://www.QandO.net
Jon Henke:

Mohammad Atta’s mother "sacrificed", too.

You ninny.

—furious
 
Written By: furious_a
URL: http://www.shanksvillememorial.com
Great Moments in "MORAL AUTHORITY"...

Moral Authority accrueth, and it frittereth away. To wit...

Ted Kennedy—Marriage.

Jesse Jackson—Civil Rights.

Million Mom March—Arithmetic and Gun Violence.

John Kerry—Vietnam.

Catholic Archdiocese of Boston—Suffer the Little Children.

Add Cindy Sheehan to the list.

—furious
 
Written By: furious_a
URL: http://www.shanksvillememorial.com
Look at the definition of the word.
She’s made no such sacrifice, Jon.
Therefore, she has no moral authority, here.
 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitheads.blogspot.com
Wow. This is better than CROSSFIRE (but of course, crossfire sucked so…nevermind). And I’ve yet to see Mr. Henke get so fired up… very entertaining. Here’s hoping you don’t get so mad at me, man.
(I just realized that being entertained via this subject matter doesn’t quite sit well with me right now. Oh well. Whadayaguna do?)

What really pisses me off, while we’re at it now anyway, is that a legitimate position such as being against the war, as I am, and its ancillary protest is being turned into such a party.
I watched the news today and saw anti-war protesters gettin’ jiggy with it (as I have seen this in the past). I mean come on!?!
There were acoustical guitars, tambouring tambourines, peace sign banners, and what I was sure was (there wasn’t audio, you understand) Janice Joplin doppelgangers singing in the background. How revolting!

I can’t stand it when legitimate issues are being paraded about by assumably ignorant hippies, and yet they get an enormous amount of undue exposure.

Don’t you hippies see that you’re just giving the partisans ammunition?

If you want to be taken seriously, then take a bath, shave your armpits, and put on decent attire. This will make you credible and respectable, and will enhance your cause accordingly.

Hey. I know it sucks. But didn’t you do it to get a job? Not everyone of you works at a music store, do you?

Wise up.
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
There’s a reason all that comes out, Pogue. THe reason is the same as when it’s all come out before.


The reason?

The issue isn’t a legit one. ONly when you come to that conclusion, does the rest of what you note make any sense at all.




 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitheads.blogspot.com
She does have the moral authority

Lots of us have some sort of "moral authority" then.

How about people who lost relatives in 9/11? I guess they have some sort of moral authority, yes?

How about people who didn’t die in 9/11, but survived the attack. Do they have any moral authority, or does that only vest upon death?

How about the thousands of people in NYC and DC that were running through the streets in abject confusion and terror that day? Any moral authority there?

This is getting complicated.....you better come up with some sort of hierarchy to show which moral authority trumps others so we know in whose presence we have to "shut up"

 
Written By: shark
URL: http://


Here....this post by John Cole just about sums up everything that needs to be said on this issue.
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
oops!

http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=5263

 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
When Osama nukes an American city, people will forget all about Cindy Sheehan and Valerie Plame, just like people forgot about Gary Condit and Chandra Levy when 9/11 happened.

Then Bush will be a hero with a 99.9% approval rating when he nukes the whole Middle East and scares the whole world into total submission to the United States.

The .1% who will oppose Bush’s actions will be the stupid Michael Moore liberals who give aid and comfort to Osama and Saddam. Of course all of them will be arrested and tortured in Guantanamo Bay.
 
Written By: Predictor
URL: http://
that last comment by "Predictor" is, by far, the most batshit-insane ridiculous nonsense that ever my eyes have come across. I will fall asleep tonight literally praying that it was meant as some kind of disgusting ill-advised attempt at satire.
 
Written By: N. Rogers
URL: http://
The issue isn’t a legit one.

Bithead. Are you missing a few bits? Are you telling me that there are no legitimate reasons as to why we shouldn’t have gone into Iraq? You must be kidding.

Try telling that to most of the country. Polls are reflecting that most Americans don’t think it was a good idea that we went into Iraq.
And don’t give me that lazy line about polls being snapshots, either. That “snapshot” bullshit can be applied to anything. I know people that voted for Bush in 2000 and then voted for Kerry in ’04, and vice versa. So by that reasoning, then aren’t elections just snapshots?

There are many qualified reasons we should have stayed out of Iraq.
Just as there are many qualified reasons we did what we did.

Just because a few misguided hippies turn a legitimate issue into a party doesn’t disqualify the majority of Americans. Hippies will take anything and protest it, then turn any protest into a party. This situation reminds me of the film PCU. Hilarious.

(I await the public opinion explanation to be blamed on the media)
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
When Cindy Sheehan starts rambling about neocon conspiracies and Israel being behind the Iraq war, do we still have to acceede to her absolute moral authority and "shut the fuck up?"

 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Of course the Media gets part of the blame.
What does the public have to judge things on, other than the constinuous stream of anti-war propaganda being fed them?

Where for example, is the reportage of the large turnout supporting the President’s actions in Crawford yesterday?

There are no qualified reasons for us to have stayed out of Iraq.
None.

And your attempt to make something out of nothing simply by saying it exists, smacks to me of an attempt at ’creative physics’.

Someone else... and I forget who... brought up an interesting point last night, that speaks directly to the remainder of your comments;

You seem quite willing to accept the ’moral authority’ of Cindy SHeehan to speak to all this; But you seem strangely reluctant, as does the above mentioned press, along with the remainder of the left, of course, to speak to the moral authority taken in hand by Casey Sheehan.

Why is that?
 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitheads.blogspot.com
Cindy Sheehan is doing nothing more than dishonering her son and his memory. I understand her grief, but to betray her son’s memory and his personal honor for her own satisfaction is beyond belief. She wants a perfect idealistic world that can never happen as long as there are different people. My guess is her son was moved by the actions of 9/11 and wanted to be part of hunting down these terrorist and bringing them to justice. Unfortunately Iraq was a terrorist country whose people were opressed by a cruel sadistic dictator. If we in this country are ever in that position, I would hope that somewhere in this world another country would care enough to come to our aid.
 
Written By: Ghostrider
URL: http://
Cindy Sheehan wishes for an America at peace.

An America at peace in the real world can only be achieved by America defending it’s peace and freedoms.

On 911 America was attacked by a terrorist organisation headed by an Iranian, funded by Iranian charities, preaching the wahhabist religion of Iran and the hiijackers were mostly Iranians. It was neccessary for the President to ensure the safety of America by responding to these attacks. He chose to attack Afghanistan which served as the main base for the terrorist organisation. He then chose to attack Iraq, a long time enemy of Iran.

The reasons for not attacking Iran were various - oil, political corruption in Washington, the fear that something else worse may happen - no direct answer was given and any hint that Iran may be at fault was dismissed. Instead of standing straight up and confronting the wahhabists and ensuring peace President Bush has provided America with a war he suggests will last generations.

Cindy Sheehan wants peace, George Bush promises eternal war - is anyone surprised she is camped on his doorstep?
 
Written By: unaha-closp
URL: http://warisforwinning.blogspot.com/
The reasons for not attacking Iran were various - oil, political corruption in Washington, the fear that something else worse may happen

Try looking at the map while realizing that the Iranians have a better military than the Taliban. Perhaps you’ll come up with a really obvious reason or two that aren’t in your list.

 
Written By: Mark A. Flacy
URL: http://
No, they lots of nice stuff but they are led by incompetent cousins who are shunted into the military as an alternative to a real job.
 
Written By: unaha-closp
URL: http://warisforwinning.blogspot.com/
No, they lots of nice stuff but they are led by incompetent cousins who are shunted into the military as an alternative to a real job.

Well, I’m sure that the DIA would like to talk to your source(s) for that little nugget.

 
Written By: Mark
URL: http://
America sold them more than two-thirds of their equipment. Stories of their lacksidaysical (?spelling?) approach are quite common. I would hope that the DIA have been paying attention. If not then just ask the Vinnell Corp.

The fact is that the US President chose to attack a psychotic dictator heading a battle hardened military armed with chemical WMDs and prepared to use them. But not to attack a much weaker country, whose military has never fought and is armed with conventional weapons only.

If this is your really obvious military strength reason, I am not getting it.
 
Written By: Unaha-closp
URL: http://
If this is your really obvious military strength reason, I am not getting it.

Perhaps you should look at lines of supply and terrain; even so, you aren’t getting it and don’t get it. It would take a little more than our airmobile and airbourne assets to invade Iran, don’t you think?

 
Written By: Mark A. Flacy
URL: http://
Okay you got me Iran is way too hard.

How abouts Saudi Arabia? ;-)
 
Written By: Unaha-closp
URL: http://
The fear that is stalking the Right Wing is that the Cindy show and others like it will lead to a post Vietnam type bloodbath.

100,000 murdered; 500,000 adrift at sea - about 1/2 of those died.

Would such an outcome be acceptable to our lefty friends?

How about no worse than Rawanda?

====================================

How about the new anti-war motto - If we leave Iraq it will turn out no worse than Rawanda.

An honorable position to be sure.

 
Written By: M. Simon
URL: http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/
I thought it was the Islamic Nazis who promised eternal war.
 
Written By: M. Simon
URL: http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/
By the moral authority vested in me I now pronounce you unable to speak.

Simon - Pope of the Sainted Mothers of Dead War Heros and Bush Dupes
 
Written By: M. Simon
URL: http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/
Fuck Sheehan that attention whore. I’m sure her son is rolling in his grave knowing she would turn on the service THAT HE WILLINGLY JOINED. He knew the risks of joining and he gladly accepted them to protect all of us. I don’t care that his mom is a media slut that has turned on our servicemen. I pray for each and every soldier that has died and for those that are still abroad.

Fuck Cindy
Fuck Move On (get over it, Bush won. You aren’t the majority)



 
Written By: psymo
URL: http://
I am sympathetic to Cindy Sheehan’s loss, but find it very hard to stay that way for these reasons:

  1. Casey, her son, voluntarily enlisted in the army, reenlisted, and "By all accounts, he was aware that his unit would be going to Iraq when he re-upped." (from recoveringliberal.com), which means that he had a chance to "get out" and didn’t. This leads me to believe that he was not as against the war as Cindy says.

  2. Soon after meeting the President after Casey’s death, Cindy said
    Quote(from article in The Reporter, Vacaville’s newspaper):"I now know he’s sincere about wanting freedom for the Iraqis," Cindy said after their meeting. "I know he’s sorry and feels some pain for our loss. And I know he’s a man of faith." I suppose that this might be very deep sarcasm, but since the rest of the article said that the Sheehans "felt whole again" and since Pat, Cindy’s husband said "We have a lot of respect for the office of the president, and I have a new respect for him because he was sincere and he didn’t have to take the time to meet with us." , I think it was truly her thoughts. However later she changed her mind: Quote:(from CNN) "He wouldn’t look at the pictures of Casey. He didn’t even know Casey’s name," she told CNN Sunday. "Every time we tried to talk about Casey and how much we missed him, he would change the subject." Sheehan said she was so distraught at the time that she failed to ask the questions she now wants answered. So she was "distraught" but "felt whole again" AT THE SAME TIME. Right...
    See how the Democrats try to explain this here.

  3. Cindy says quote: (from World Net Daily) "My son was killed in 2004. I am not paying my taxes for 2004," Sheehan told an audience of Veterans for Peace. "You killed my son, George Bush, and I don’t owe you a penny. ... You give my son back and I’ll pay my taxes. Come after me [for back taxes] and we’ll put this war on trial."
    You would think that Cindy would realize that part of taxes go to buy supplies for our troops. Also, Cindy was not paying her taxes in 1996 (see proof here in the Solano County records.) This leads me to believe that this was not in fact a way to protest the war, ESPECIALLY SINCE THE WAR HADN’T EVEN BEGUN THEN.

  4. Casey’s family does not agree with Cindy. Cindy’s husband is divorcing her. And Casey’s aunt and godmother sent this to the Drudge Report:

    Our family has been so distressed by the recent activities of Cindy we are breaking our silence and we have collectively written a statement for release. Feel free to distribute it as you wish.

    Thanks, Cherie

    In response to questions regarding the Cindy Sheehan/Crawford Texas issue: Sheehan Family Statement:

    The Sheehan Family lost our beloved Casey in the Iraq War and we have been silently, respectfully grieving. We do not agree with the political motivations and publicity tactics of Cindy Sheehan. She now appears to be promoting her own personal agenda and notoriety at the the expense of her son’s good name and reputation. The rest of the Sheehan Family supports the troops, our country, and our President, silently, with prayer and respect.

    Sincerely,

    Casey Sheehan’s grandparents, aunts, uncles and numerous cousins.

  5. Lastly, Cindy Sheehan is just plain whiny. In her blogs at sacramentofordemocracy.org she describes herself as "the sacrificial lamb of the peace movement" and complains about not having enough shade. But read for yourself and tell Cindy how you feel. I have left Cindy comments under the screenname "kt". Unfortunately, she has not answered back and appears to have stopped writing blog there (or at least sending her blogs there). You can read more at my blog: Stand Up and Speak Out


 
Written By: kt
URL: http://standupandspeakout.blogspot.com/
Cindy Sheehan has responded to President Bush’s comments concerning meeting her and has posted her response in The huffington Post. The first statement Cindy Sheehan makes that comes off as anti-democratic is this one and I quote Cindy Sheehan- " Does anyone else know what "democratic" means? It simply means majority rule. Not some high-minded, free-floating, pie in the sky ideal. It means 50 percent plus one." Cindy Sheehen in that particular statement actually attacks 51 % majority rule as a bad form of government and if you can read anything else into that, defending that statement, please make your comment at the end of this post. I would like to say to Cindy Sheehan that 50 plus one is much better then Saddam’s 1 % plus brutal totalitarian rule in which the 1% Saddam, rules 99 % of the entire population. Maybe Sheehan has met with some socialist organizations that oppose democratic forms of government. I did notice that a socialist website called ’Socialist Worker Online’ is running a rather large article advocating Sheehans position. Cindy Sheehan actually gave an interview to the Socialist Worker Online, she spoke to Socialist Worker’s ERIC RUDER which is mentioned at the beginning of the article. In her interview with the Socialist Worker Online she says and I quote " Some people may think that we’re fighting terrorism over there. But when is that job ever going to be complete? Terrorism is just a new “ism.” It was “communism” when I was growing up." Here Cindy Sheehan is discounting the validity of the threat of communism in the past as just a made up " ism." I believe history taught us that communism brutally oppressed and killed millions of innocent people and is still somewhat of a threat today in places like North Korea where millions have died from starvation due to KimYong II, brutal rule. Cindy Sheehan later went on to say and I quote " I DEFINITELY think that we should support war resisters in the military". I will leave that statement up to the readers interpretation, but it sounds to me to border on subversion and treason. Here is Cindy Sheehan’s interview with the Socialist Workers Online in its entirety http://www.socialistworker.org/2005-2/549/549_06_CindySheehan.shtml .
The next statement Cindy Sheehan makes is both inaccurate and untruthful and I quote
"This is the biggest smokescreen from him yet. I didn’t ask him to withdraw the troops, I asked him what Noble Cause did Casey die for." Actually Cindy Sheehen didn’t ask Bush, she demanded that he "bring the troops home now", here is a quote from her statement made on August 18 2005 and carried by ABC News ""If George Bush comes out here today or if we leave here at the end of August, this is only the beginning, and we’re not going to stop until our troops are brought home", I would suggest that means a withdrawal what would you think it means? Also in this ABC article written by Eric Noe it is stated " In addition to requesting a meeting with Bush, Sheehan is now calling for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. She promised to send a similar message if the president agrees to meet with her." Here is the complete article you be the judge http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=1045556&page=1&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312 . Is ABC lying, did they just make that up? I have myself watched Cindy Sheehan on national television say time and time again "bring our troops home now" but she has stated that she has never intended to ask Bush that question. I smell another lie. Whats really strange is in Cindys own article she just released today she says this and I quote " Then bring our troops home. The status quo in Iraq is awful", if you ask me she cant even get through one article without contradicting herself. She goes on to imply that America is spreading "imperialism " by what she says is 14 permanent bases being set up in Iraq the size of Sacramento, California. I dont know if there is any United States military bases on the entire planet Earth the size of a large U.S. city,if there is please let me know ok. By the way the interview Cindy Sheehan gave to the Socialist Worker is the same Socialist worker who ran this article entitled " The Meaning of Marxism" in which they praise Marxism to no end. Here is the link to that garbage http://www.socialistworker.org/Featured/MeaningOfMarxism.shtml



 
Written By: Wilhelm
URL: http://amothershyperbole.blogspot.com
CINDY SHEEHAN IS A DISGRACE. A TOTAL ATTENTION LOVING SOCIALIST PIG. HER SON VOLUNTEERED FOR THE WAR. Now shes remembers him by disgracing everything he beleived in. CASEY SHEEN IS A HERO TO US ALL, BUT HIS MOTHER WILL BE DELT WITH BY GOD. CASEY DOES NOT WANT TO BE REMEMBERED IN THIS AWFUL WAY.
 
Written By: Patrick
URL: http://google.com
first of all, CINDY SHEEHAN NEEDS TO SHUT THE HELL UP ALREADY. I’M SICK OF HER, AND I’M SICK OF HER FOLLOWERS. AND THE REASON HER SON DIED IS BECAUSE HE GOT SICK OF HER, WHY DO YOU THINK HE "VOLUNTEERED" IN THE MILITARY(STUPIDS).AND PLUS HE ENLISTED AGAIN TO GO TO IRAQ. MAYBE HE WANTED A WAY OUT BY SHOWING US THAT HE’S A HERO NOT A CHICKEN SHIT, BY SUICIDING HIMSELF AT HOME WITH NO PRIDE. SO ALL OF YOU SAVE YOUR BREATH AND TALK ABOUT SOMETHING CONSTRUCTIVE AND SUPPORT BUSH, DAMNS YOU!!!
 
Written By: JESSE
URL: http://
While I sympathize with Cindy Sheehan over the death of her son, I cannot help but think that if it were my son who died with honor defending the country he knew and loved, that I would be able to hold my head up high and back the decision he made. I could not in good conscience protest a war that was truly necessary to begin the battle against Islamic radicalism. This battle must and will be won by freedom loving people worldwide. If the U.S. must act alone, then so be it. It is not worth losing another 3 to 4 thousand innocent people to the next terrorist episode if no action is taken. No Mrs. Sheehan, your ideas are wrong, your whole ideology is wrong, and as sorry as I am that you lost your son, you should apologize to the rest of the country, admit you were wrong, go away quietly and honor your sons good name.
 
Written By: Dennis Broderick
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider